Talk:Decimation (comics)

First Foursaken

Have they officially been called mutants during Claremont's run of Uncanny X-Men? I seriously do not recall this being stated and Wikipedia has been the only source I've seen that uses this information. 71.51.39.83 (talk) 04:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Archer

Archer wasn't necessarily confirmed powered, was he? I know that in Endangered Species Beast noticed a trend, but was it confirmed a clear-cut rule and was he ever mentioned? 76.0.91.153 (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Irving (Generation M)

Question. Where was it stated that he is actualy powered and not just one of those who kept theire changed physical apearance?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.63.83 (talk • contribs) -- 11 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.63.83 (talk • contribs) 16:09 October 11, 2006

Eosimias (comics)

Where was this character revealed to be powered and living at the school? I keep seeing him (?) listed in various articles as powered and residing at the school. Granted, I've stopped reading New X-Men, but have not heard anything about this character recently. Breakaway 07:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Non-existent New X-Men characters

After checking through New X-Men #24 over and over, I did NOT see characters E-Shock, Jet Storm, and Time Master appear in it. M.Factor 04:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Mike Marts Confirmation

Where did Mike Marts confirm all of those mutants to be depowered? M.Factor 04:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Pending some form of citation or confirmation, I've removed both sets of information being questioned by M.Factor. The Mike Marts chart particularly smacks of being based on a private conversation (e.g. "Mike Marts told me at a convention...") rather than a verifiable source. If an editor can confirm these bits of information, revert or pull from the July 24 edit I've made -Markeer 15:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Just for the question which source should we belive about Marrows status Mike Marts or the official Handbook?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.22.141 (talk • contribs) -- 26 September 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.26.4 (talk • contribs) 13:46 September 26, 2006

Although we do not use OHOTMU stats, story-related info can be used with caution. Marts can only be used if citation references an appropriate, reliable source and should be clearly marked as having not yet seen print in story form. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 15:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Marts can also make mistakes, why don't we simply keep her out of these lists until the status is clear? Also you guys take what is writen in The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe as source to list characters powered so why not Marrow? She is called powered in it.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.26.4 (talk • contribs) -- 28 September 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.141.26.4 (talk • contribs) 21:35 September 28, 2006

Wolverine

Just changing the Wolverine comic link from the wolverine animal link to the Wolverine comic link. Whispering 21:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC) disambiguation link repair (You can help!)

-- I don't think Alexander Lexington should be included here. The Sentinel Squad ONE series is set before the group's first appearance, which was in a comic set on M-Day. As this book is about the team's formation and training it would be before M-Day, so Lex would still have his powers. I'm not sure if Meld has shown up post-M-Day or not.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.89.224.216 (talk • contribs) -- 18 March 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.89.224.216 (talk • contribs) 20:41 18 March, 2006 Indeed it's clear by now that Meld should not be on the list. His only appearances are in the Sentinel Squad ONE miniseries, set before M-Day, and the mention in the 198 files book. That mention does refer to him as a mutant, but it also refers to him as being a member of the team still, which he was not as of M-Day, so it is out of date either way. We have nothing to show him as a mutant.

Isn't Mr. Immortal Homo-Supreme and not Homo-Superior? Isn't Doorman actually deceased but re-incarnated as an agent of Oblivion with powers granted by Oblivion? Aren't Cloak and Dagger only mutants in a lame retcon that nobody pays attention to, kind of like Doc Ock at the gamma bomb site?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.30.190.4 (talk • contribs) -- 15 April 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.190.4 (talk • contribs) 20:26 April 15, 2006

WHO SCREWED UP THIS PAGE!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.251.173.250 (talk • contribs) -- 8 April 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.251.173.250 (talk • contribs) 20:24 April 8, 2006

A response and a problem

First of all, noone screwed it up, this is taken from a official Marvel list.

Second, I have noticed that on every page that the House of M, M-Day, or Decimation are mention a differnt pecentage of mutants losing their powers is used, is there one official number that should be being used on all of them?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhackrviper (talk • contribs) -- 21 April 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhackrviper (talk • contribs) 01:01 21 April, 2006

Yes, the number of mutants left is 198.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.135.113 (talk • contribs) -- 8 May 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.135.113 (talk • contribs) 19:47 May 8, 2006

Wrongo, it has been mention numerous times as an "innacuurate number". Plus, I was talking about the percentage, not the bumer, I've see nthe percentage range from 90-99% --Madhackrviper 23:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The number of mutants left after the Decimation is more than 198. The 198 is used symbolically, I'm sure this has been pointed out already elsewhere, but it bothers me that on some articles it lists this is as fact when it is not. Also, which was pointed out above, there are multiple instances in multiple articles that have a different percentage of mutants depowered. Drunknesmonsta (talk) 03:13, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Would it be possible to add in a reading order?

Or perhaps a publication order (this one I can do myself). I've searched long and hard checking if there is an order I'm supposed to go in.. Nothing. The marvel site is really a piece of trash, so it's not bee much help.

Also, I added the X-Factor 1-4 in the Decimation line, as it was missing.

--Cryptik 19:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

32 16 or 8 million?

Quoting from the article:

the number has been referred to as "symbolic" rather than actual. Numbers for pre-Decimation mutants vary from "over a million" (House of M #8) to 16 million (New X-Men #115, where it is said that the 16 million mutants who died on Genosha was around "half" the mutant population)

But if 16 million is "half" the mutant population, then the mutant population is 32 million. Alternately, only 8 million died in on Genosha. If someone who has the source could confirm, that would be great. — vijay (Talk) 21:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Around 16 million died on Genosha, leaving (around) 16 million left. Numbers not precise. - SoM 02:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

This is stating the obvious, but there's a lot of bad math concerning the entire matter. At least the Professor X article states that 91.4 % of the mutants were depowered; so if 198 represents 8.6 % of the original mutant population, there were only 2,302 to begin with. Elswhere I've seen a figure of 98 %, which would still put the original count just below 10,000. When in fact narrowing an original of 16 million (based on above statements, I haven't read the particular stories myself) down to 198 would mean a 99.9988 % decrease in numbers. Many people think 1 % a smaller unit than it really is – especially when dealing with large numbers – and this seems to include comicbook writers. --Anshelm '77 00:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning that 'decimate' is being used in its very incorrect form - to decimate means to reduce by 10%, NOT reduce to 10%.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

In the article? I think Peter David addressed the issue of the meaning of decimate as well. StarSpangledKiwi (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

While you are correct on the definition of decimate, at this point its arguing semantics. At the end of the day, it seems that Marvel doesn't even have a grasp of the amount of mutants in existence. Granted its been 40+ years since the original X-Men's introduction and a number of of mutants have been introduced since then. It seems that Marvel needs to get a better handle on the number of mutants that are in existence. It's just so damn confusing. Drunknesmonsta (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

198 listing and the Stepford Cuckoos

Shouldn't Celeste, Mindee and Phoebe be listed as three seperate mutants as opposed to a part of a collective group and a singular member of the 198? Didn't change it of my own accord in case I'm wrong in some strange way...-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.193.42 (talk • contribs) -- 20 June 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.193.42 (talk • contribs) 13:45 June 20, 2006

198 Questions Some of these characters have not been confirmed as far as I remember. Emplate and a couple of others have not been seen as either powered or depowered. I also think that the Three-in-One and Collective Man do count as one mutant since they were that way in the files.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.172.177 (talk • contribs) -- 31 July 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.172.177 (talk • contribs) 18:25 July 31, 2006

No, they are different people but have linked powers. That's it. And for Emplate and all the character who were in the Handbooks, if they aren't listed as depowered, then they're powered, Eric J Moreels told me, whn I asked over at ComixFan.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) -- 13 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) 18:30 October 13, 2006

What a mess....

This article is a mess- especialy the 198 list! Where have Eosimias, Gregor Smyrdiakov, or "the SHIELD Psi-Agents" reappear? There are no sources! Can we organize this like depowered list?-Merlin Storm

It needs to be mostly deleted because it's inaccurate and uncited. --Chris Griswold 00:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not, although they weren't in the 198 Files, Gregor was in Mutopia X #5 and the SHIELD agents in New Avenger, the Collective story ! --Siemgi

Also, the references section is broken, with a lot of visible HTML markup. Scraimer 21:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Please explain what "died after the explosion of the bus" means to non readers. thx User:Sfrostee 1 May 2007

198 List

In one week, I will begin to delete uncited characters in the 198 list. --Chris Griswold 07:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Now lets see- Skids and Indra were confirmed in Blood of Apocalypse(XM) part 1and Childhoods End(NXM) part1, Madame Web was confimed in Feral(ASM) part 4, Negasonic was in Torn(AXM) part1, and....that's all I know. Anyone have more info?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.251.162.94 (talk • contribs) -- 12 August 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.251.162.94 (talk • contribs) 22:20 August 12, 2006

I edited it for errors (including correct alphabetization), and it was reverted! WHAT THE HELL!Merlin Storm 00:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

And I put the list back on. Talk about having a God complex "in one week I will blah blah blah". Try actually reading a comic book then maybe you'll know that most of these mutants were confirmed as having their powers and part of the 198 in the X-Men: 198 Files one-shot. If you really want to get your jollies, you can delete the ones that aren't part of the 198 and only speculated. Actually, I'll do that for you. Originalsinner 20:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Then cite them. The whole thing is uncited. Did you respond within the past week? If you had, I wouldn't have removed it. Drop the "god complex" accusations and discuss this, and we'll fix it together. Otherwise, of the three of us that have discussed this in the past two weeks, two want it to be gone and only you want it to stay. I do appreciate, however, that you --Chris Griswold(☏) 00:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like point out that I thought you had restored the entire list, but it turns out that you had actually made a great decision to cut it down to the 198 and cite the 198 Files, which is a great start. Thanks. --Chris Griswold(☏) 01:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Now there's the problem. People are getting confused between the confirmed 198 and the remaining mutants who weren't part of the 198 handbook. Which is now ticking me off because after I culled the last list, it got reversed to include the other mutants. This is possibly gonna turn into the same problem the wikipedia has with the Omega-level mutants page. Apart from deleting the list, what do y'all suggest we should do. I know who's been confirmed through the 198 handbook, but the other mutants (esp the D-listers) I don't really know how to cite them. Eg Vulcan and Darwin aren't 198 because they were introduced after Decimation. Oh and sorry bout the God complex dig, but you were sounding like a lil' dictator for a tad (this is a joke)Originalsinner 04:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

So that's the Civil War, Decimation, and Omega-level lists that are having problems with uncited listings. Can you think of any others? I'm going to take this to the WP:CMC talk page so that maybe a larger group of editors can find a solution. --Chris Griswold(☏) 05:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Not off the top of my head but I'll keep you posted. It does annoy me as well with all the uncited crud. Didn't realise Civil War was being screwed over as well. Originalsinner 19:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion over mutants COVERED in the Official Handbooks of the Marvel Universe and who was revealed still powered. Mondo, Mastermind II, etc. may have had entries, but their whereabouts and mutant statuses are still unknown. Also, I have no idea where people are getting all these real name listings for characters like Mondo.

As I said, Eric J Moreels told me that the mutants who were in the Handbooks, and not listed as powered or depowered are supposed powered. That's why their powers are listed in the present tense, for instance. And the name is just people who like to write crap. And by the way, how do you make your name appear ? I can't do that/don't know how. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) -- 13 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) 18:40 October 13, 2006

Why did somebody delete that list ? -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs)

On another note, I don't believe Quake is actually classified as a mutant with an X-Gene, so I don't think she applies. M.Factor 21:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed the 198 list

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#"Factual" Lists, e.g. X-Men: The 198 Files for details. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The 198 Files

Since this is a book, with entries about the powered mutants, I don't see why people keep telling that its unreferenced statement. And it's no more copyright violation than citing other names is it ?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) -- 13 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) 18:43 October 13, 2006

Actually it is since it's the "exact" list Marvel bought out hence a copyright violation. Originalsinner 18:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, then every article is a copyright violation. And who f***ed the whole powered part up ?-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) -- 15 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Siemgi (talk • contribs) 21:20 October 15, 2006

Please sign your posts by adding ~~~~. Additionally, please calm down. Take a moment to read WP:CIVIL. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 21:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Well I'm not calming down. I am just done here, fed up of constantly trying to make articls better only to have it edited out. Siemgi

Just a thought. Why not make the list just like the depowered list? That'd make it clearer wouldn't it ?

You know what's fun? My work was contantly edited out but that article is a real mess, with fake names, non-mutants and errors. If you really want us to look at you as a moderator Chris, then at least to your job correctly.

You're right: This article is a mess. It's also not a very important article, and I have a life other than Wikipedia which precludes me from fixing all of your sloppy work. Let's wipe the article and start over. Being an admin is not my job, and, actually, I don't ask that you look at me as anything; I'd prefer you not look at me altogether. If you want me to take anything you say seriously from now on, register an account. Oh, and try not to violate copyright anymore. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The last time I tried to make some clean up it was dubbed vandalism. So what should I do ?Siemgi.

So, I begna doing some clean up. Feel free to help. Siemgi

Remove Shadow King

It is stated by the Shadow King himself that he is not the Shadow King of this dimension along with the along with all the other extra dimensional X-Men that fought New Excalibur.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.81.95 (talk • contribs) -- 14 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.81.95 (talk • contribs) 17:29 October 14, 2006

Captain Britian

Not a mutant. Please remove. He's related to two very powerful ones but his powers are magical based just as Lion Heart's.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.81.95 (talk • contribs) -- 14 October 2006 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.81.95 (talk • contribs) 17:31 October 14, 2006

Felicia Hardy and the Owl

Hi

I was wondering if both Felicia Hardy and the Owl should be included in the confirmed mutants section since both are mutants. Though Felicia is a latent mutant who under went a process to "release" her bad luck powers. The Owl though is a mutant. Just thought I'd ask before adding them.

Thanks

RIANZ 23:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Too bad

I thinks it is too bad that the powered section was changed. Listing the issue in which they were reaveled powered next to them (à la depowered) would make the list clearer. And by the way Asp isn't a mutant.

Man, all this hard work and dedication to creating such a really nice list, its going to be so sad when the status quo is returned.--Mullon 04:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually Asp is a mutant. Check out her profile on Marvel.com. RIANZ 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The Notes with the Confirmed.

Just wondering whether or not the notes really should be there since some of them do conflict with the articles of the characters eg Asp and Owl (both articles state they are mutants) or just revert to how the list was at years end. RIANZ 00:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Not Really Mutants

Ultra Girl is a mutant Kree and thus the x-factor gene is likely not part of her genetic makeup. In the Marvel Universe you must have an active x-factor gene to be considered a mutant.

Also, Wiccan and Speed are not confirmed to actually be mutants so I don't really think they belong here.

I forgot, Cloak and Dagger *aren't* mutants. They normal humans who were given powers after being given drugs laced with mutant growth hormone. Technically, they are *mutates* in the same vain as Spider-Man and the Hulk. Since they got their powers from drugs rather than the natural activation of the x-gene, they're not mutants in the Decimation sense.

Since when were Fenris not considered mutants? I have right in front of me Generation X '96 Annual, in which Andrea tells Andreas they need to get away from Synch because "when you and I are together, our mutant powers are activa--." She is then cut off by an explosion caused by Synch mimicking their powers. Not only do we have dialogue confirmation from Andrea herself, but was Synch ever shown to mimic a non-mutant? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.31.88.160 (talk) 03:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Confirmed?

Has it been confirmed that Scarlet Witch still has her powers? Or that Kimura is a mutant and not enhanced by some other means?

Also, while Namor is traditionally called "the first mutant" he gets his powers from being half Atlantian. Not from the x-factor gene. He is, actually, an Atlantean mutant which is not the same as the standard Marvel Universe mutant.

I'm not sure if he's even an Atlantean Mutant. He is certainly a hybrid, and for all we know EVERY cross-breed between humans and Atlanteans result in individuals with his powers (which would make a pretty interesting What if? story, or an Exiles story). That holds true with Namorita and Namora; although, it could be that it only works with Namor's royal family's lineage. Rosencomet (talk) 01:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sunfire

Isn't Shiro still a mutant? It was never shown or revealed that he lost his powers due to Wanda's Hosue of M effect. He had lost his powers because Rogue basically "drained" him in her last mini-series and the next time we see him, he's being recruited by Apocalypse.

In this sense, he still has the X-Gene, unlike Polaris who lost hers. This is what makes Sunfire a mutant still. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Volk006 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

Eye-Scream

Shouldn't Eye-Scream be added to the un-confirmed list of mutants that we don't know are powered/depowered?

New Marauders

Whoever keeps adding Harpoon to the list of confirmed mutants, don't. He was confirmed depowered in New Avengers #18. And Vertigo isn't a mutant at all, she's a savage land mutate. Just because they're in the Marauders group does not mean they're mutants. Sinister himself is a mutate, and not a mutant, so there's no reason why you should assume everyone in the group must be a mutant. --156.34.91.97 10:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Mentallo

Mentallo is to be considered deceased for now. In the Super-Villain Team-Up: MODOK's 11 limited series he was shown blasted and incinerated by the Ultra-Adaptoid. After said incineration he landed face down in a river, and stayed there, motionless. No one without a healing factor could survive that level of burn, and if by chance he did, there's no way someone could stay conscious during said incineration, so when he hit the water (if he wasn't already dead) he would have drowned. See images: here(1) and here(2) --Venomaru 2.0 19:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sunfire decimation.png

Image:Sunfire decimation.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Mulholland Black

The Order #8 shows that Mulholland Black was a mutant who lost her powers on M-Day. In that same issue she gets her powers back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyrocket (talk • contribs) 23:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Molly Hayes?

Wouldn't Molly Hayes, of the Runaways series, as well as her parents, be still-powered mutants and thus belong on the list? Torca (talk) 03:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit: I see her now under Bruiser (should that really be what she's listed under?), but not the parents. Torca (talk) 05:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Done - it passes (although it did need an infobox, which I just added). (Emperor (talk) 02:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC))

Image issues

The fair use of image:Sunfire decimation.png in this article is questionable. Listed below is/are the reason(s) for this:
• Significance: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase, or its lack would significantly hinder, understanding the topic of the article. Full policy

The image is replicating information that is presented in the text of the article. The presence of the image does not add anything to the article since the text clearly states the information.

If the above concern(s) can be addressed in light of the relevant policies and/or guidelines, the image use can be retained. If not, the image needs to be removed from the article.

The issue with Sunfire decimation.png has been addressed.

The fair use of image:SONOFM001.jpg in this article is questionable. Listed below is/are the reason(s) for this:
• Significance: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase, or its lack would significantly hinder, understanding the topic of the article. Full policy
• Use in a list article or section. Full guideline

Placed only as the cover art of one of the listed series involved in the story line. Does not add significantly and worse, it's a stretch for a illustration of a list since it isn't an illustration of the series.

If the above concern(s) can be addressed in light of the relevant policies and/or guidelines, the image use can be retained. If not, the image needs to be removed from the article.

The issue with SONOFM001.jpg has been addressed.

- J Greb (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Images removed since there has been no indication as to why they should be retained. - J Greb (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed List

Shouldn't the confirmed list include those that have gotten their powers back, like Professor X, Polaris, Pietro, etc? (and what's with all the "p"s?)

And how can Franklin Richards be included? Weren't his powers burned out before the Decimation? Or was it after? He doesn't seem to have any now... but you never can tell about that. If he does, he's powerful enough to bring everyone's back, if he's motivated right.Rosencomet (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Medellin Prien

NIET levend, noch is zij bevestigde dat nog steeds een mutant. Wat is onlangs verschenen in de pagina's van Uncanny X-Men is NIET Maddie, maar slechts de essentie van de Goblin Queen op zoek naar een ontvangende instantie, zoals wordt bevestigd door de schrijver Matt Fraction zichzelf. Ga naar karakter Madelyne's pagina voor de link en bevestiging. Dus, voor de gebruikers die ervoor zorgen met inbegrip van haar in de lijst; stoppen.68.49.68.231 (talk) 22:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

El que importa és el que apareix en-COMICS, no el que es va dir completament fora de la màniga en una sola entrevista, i ni tan sols va ser el tema principal de l'entrevista de la. I el que s'ha dit en les entrevistes no són sempre la veritat de l'evangeli, però fent broma o exageració. Tornar enrere i tornar a llegir un munt d'entrevistes recents amb el mateix autor i amb altres autors sobre les històries que va escriure fa poc, i veurà que poques vegades li va dir als fets exactes. Així de parar, i oblidar l'assumpte per ara, fins que la prova absoluta es en-el-còmics en si. 06:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Since when? Numerous times I've seen editings on this site changed around due to an outside interview with the writers of the stories. What's the thing editors always push around? Notability or looking for outside sources? Or just plain old references. I know that many editors always push that stuff. I'm using actual references in my argument here, you're using your opinion. What does wiki support more; references. Anyway, you have no proof that the writer was just "kidding around". He stated what she was in a very matter of fact way, so you have no "proof" that he was lying or telling half-truths, that's your opinion on the kind of person he is and wiki doesn't deal in opinions. This is a reference until you can find something where he says that he was just kidding around with that explanation. Even looking at past interviews, Fraction constantly says or hints "Who says that's really?" Well, he just answered it for readers right there. Also, when the article is essentially a mixed Q&A type of interview there is no "main topic". It's a very bare-bones argument, and considering the writer explanation is the only thing that people have to go on, it should be taken as the truth until proven otherwise. Do that, and I'll let the matter go, but drop the sarcastic tone with all the italics, and find something that contradicts what he says.68.49.68.231 (talk) 13:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Er

So what actually happened on "M-Day"? Who is the Scarlet Witch, and how come she "depowered" most of the mutants? Some plot explanation for non-obsessives would be nice! This is supposedly a pivotal moment in the Marvel/X-Men universe, but the article gives hardly any description, concentrating on extensive and tedious lists instead. Fences&Windows 20:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I believe that is explained in the House of M article, the story arch in which in actually happened. The Decimation story archs are about the aftermath of House of M. Since, this is mentioned in the intro, along with a wiki-link to the House of M article, there's no real reason to list it again on this page.24.190.34.219 (talk) 23:12, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Malice

I'm just curious, why is Malice part of this list? When she came back, it was technically a digital copy based on her. Not a mutant at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Jay89 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Does Anyone See A Problem With Decimation and Necrosha?

I'm looking for some feedback here. From my understanding, after M-Day, 95 or so percent of mutants lost there X-Gene, including previously deceased mutants. Now in the ongoing Necrosha crossover, Selene and Eli Bard are reviving dead mutants to help their cause. Is it just me or does the resurrection of these dead mutants pose a problem? I had read that even dead mutants X-Genes simply vanished after decimation, yet we have numerous mutants being revived by the transmode virus and they have their mutant powers intact. Unless these dead mutants didn't lose their X-Genes after death like others did after The Decimation there seems to be an issue going on here...

Drunknesmonsta (talk) 01:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Status of Gargouille

I keep seeing this pop up on this page, Gargouille's page and Predator X's page. People keep listing her as dead and claiming she was one of Predator X's victims back in Uncanny X-Men 518. This is not true as Gargouille and the mutant girl from Uncanny X-Men 518 look nothing a like. Gargouille has grey hair, grey skin, large horns, wings, talons and is French. The mutant girl is blonde, blue skin and is an American; she even says so herself. To support my argument, look at this picture http://www.comicbookresources.com/prev_img.php?pid=3955&pg=2 and compare it to the one her Gargouille's wikipage. They look nothing a like which means Gargouille's last appearence was during Messiah Complex with the rest of the former Acolytes.

Mr Jay89 (talk) 12:22, 05 April 2011 (UTC)

Wiz Kid - request for discussion

Since another poster seems bound and determined to revert, and I don't want an edit war. Currently the entry reads that Wiz Kid is "mysteriously repowered" in Avengers Academy, after a SHIELD database revealed he was supposedly depowered back in New Avengers #18 when it appeared to detect his mutant energy signature within the Collective. The writer of Avengers Academy has posted online that the character's powers allow him to manipulate technology, and that Wiz Kid used those powers to "fly under the radar" - e.g. he fooled the devices that said he was depowered. This means that he was not "mysteriously repowered" as it appears he was never depowered to begin with. Granted, the writer worded it as an opinion, but this is the writer of the book the character is appearing in, so his opinion on resolving the apparent conflict between being reported depowered and being seen with powers intact count more than most. Why is it wrong to note what he said here? We're not talking about saying "this is definitely what happened" before a comic outright states it one way or another, but simply including it as part of the overall entry - "one comic says this, another contradicts it, and the writer of the second comic has said..." What is incorrect in that? As opposed to saying it is a "mysterious repowering" when the alleged mystery has been given an explanation by the person who did the repowering. The current statement is incorrect. 109.152.147.88 (talk) 06:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Decimation (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070415151629/http://www.newsarama.com:80/JoeFridays/JoeFridays21.html to http://www.newsarama.com/JoeFridays/JoeFridays21.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060320054017/http://www.marvel.com/comics/21 to http://www.marvel.com/comics/21
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060221234119/http://www.uncannyxmen.net:80/db/issues/showfaq.asp?fldAuto=287 to http://www.uncannyxmen.net/db/issues/showfaq.asp?fldAuto=287

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Decimation (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070415151629/http://www.newsarama.com:80/JoeFridays/JoeFridays21.html to http://www.newsarama.com/JoeFridays/JoeFridays21.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)