Template talk:X-Men/Archive 1

Archive 1

X2

Personally, I prefer X2: X-Men United to simply X2. I noticed (after I already made the change) that this has been an issue in the past. Can we gather some sort of consensus on it? EVula 15:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, the official title is X2. --Chris Griswold 14:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the name on it's DVD is X-Men 2--LooseTheHotButtonS 13:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

True, but the official name is X2. See X2 (film). --Chris Griswold 15:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Inclusion

I don't really see why minor concepts like the Crimson Dawn and Alkali Lake get linked from the main X-Men template when much more major concepts and characters are omitted. -Sean Curtin 04:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Such as ...? Make some suggestions. I have no problem replacing those two with something else, but I can't agree with nothing. ;) EVula 04:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I second a removal of Alkali Lake, mainly because it's a movie-only location. I would like to see the template used for comic information with links only to the films themselves. WikiFew 23:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know why Mutant X is listed off this template? While I am sure that this tv show was influenced by the X-Men in some ways, there is no mention of the X-Men on the Mutant X page. --Silver lode 03:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I know; I've been meaning to update the Mutant X article; Sony sued Marvel over the similarity between the television series and the X-Men movies, and they settled out of court. It's a TV show by Marvel about a group of mutants fighting under an enigmatic leader on behalf of mutants everywhere. It's not just influenced. --Chris Griswold 04:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I figured you guys wouldnt let it stay on there without a reason, I just couldnt seem to find what it was. --Silver lode

I recently dug up some articles that deal with the lawsuit, but this past week I've had spotty Internet service and so have been somewhat limited in what I can add. But I will be adding the information to the Mutant X article soon because it needs some out-of-universe detail anyway.--Chris Griswold 01:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Crossovers

I had desired the addition of a Crossovers section to the Template and I think Kusonaga did a good job of this, only to have it removed shortly after. I think it's important to add the most important and influential crossovers, as they have a far greater impact on the X-Men Universe than Alkali Lake or the Crimson Dawn. Perhaps, for the sake of keeping the template brief, we should compromise and include the biggest crossovers. --WikiFew 21:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, obviously, I'm in support. Kusonaga 11:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I re-added it yesterday after reading WikiFew's comment. I changed it to "Major storylines", which is slightly less-comic book jargon-y and allows for other important storylines. --Chris Griswold 17:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Eh--hottie 12:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Characters

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly these things get noticed... within twenty-four hours of my adding a character list to the template someone changes it.I have no problem with that;I'm hardly the world's greatest authority on the X-Men and if someone with greater knowledge can think of an alternative line-up then I'm happy for them to do so.However, I've changed "Shadowcat" back to "Kitty Pryde" since I feel this is what the character is better known as, hence it being the name of her character page;like Jean Grey, she has used many different codenames over the years making her real name more prominent.Skteosk (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Weren't characters removed from these templates like two years ago??--Gonzalo84 (talk) 04:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: nevermind Sookenon (talk) 09:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Series Categories

I divided the list of series up and made a new category "Past Series." It looks cleaner in my opinion, and it makes it easier to distinguish what is ongoing and what is not. We might also consider dividing Series up into Core titles and others. - StarIV (talk) 19:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yellow

Come on guys we can come up with a better color than yellow for this thing, can't we? It looks ridiculous, especially since it is an X-MEN Template and not an....Iron Fist template...Captain la rose (talk) 22:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The first step should be asking "Is there a color scheme that is iconic across the franchise?" That includes the later X-Men teams, X-Factor, X-Force, Excalibur, etc. The blue and yellow only covers the "school age" teams. If that's the best possible, then leaving the default may be wise. - J Greb (talk) 22:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It has been reverted. Rau's Speak Page 22:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Alternate Universe Titles

Since when are X-Men: First Class and Wolverine: First class alternate universes? I believe that they still take place in 616, they're just set in the past. I think either the section needs to be removed, or renamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.102.137 (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I was unsure of whether or not they are in or out of continuity, so I added them there. Feel free to change it. Rau's Speak Page 00:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the First Class titles should be listed as mainstream continuity. --Darknus823 (talk) 17:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing that happens in the book has had or has been said to have any effect on the mainstream continuity. Add to the fact of things happening in the books that date them too recent, i.e. X-Box references, plus relationships with some of the villains, like Scarlet Witch, being different from main continuity, there is nothing in them that says they are in the 616 universe.68.49.68.231 (talk) 23:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

X-men First Class and Wolverine First Class are NOT "alternate books". They take place in the 616 marvel universe, not in an alternate universe. Therefore, they are cannon, and not alternate. Labeling them as "flashback" is the best way to go. Classic X-men, while also a re-print book, also gave new material in continuity, as thus, also qualifies as a "flashback book". I reject your classification of those books as "alternate", and will forever change it unless something better is thought of. I think "flahback" is a fine classification. (Abaddon667 (talk) 17:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC))

First Class books are not in canon with the rest of the line, therefore they are not "flashback" titles, and we do no need an unnecessary line clogging up the template more. 68.49.68.231 (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagee with your logic. "Alternate" suggests a different world in the Marvel Universe. The first class stories, as well as the back-up stories from Classic X-men take place in the 616 Marvel Universe. They are thus "cannon"; not alternate. Calling the book, "flashback" denotes this point. I would disagree that this is an unnecessary distinction. (Abaddon667 (talk) 23:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC))

No, they are not canon. There are things in the books, like the characters playing X-Box, as well as relationships which do not fit in with the timelines of the original runs. Hence, they are in an alternate universe. The world's may be similar, but there are enough differences that shows they are alternate worlds, plus, absolutely nothing that has happened in the book has any effect on the main books, and there's been nothing stated as such by anyone working on the book. If you can find something that proves that they are in canon, fine but with all the things that have dated it too recent for it to fit in with past continuity of the main 616 line, there's too much proving that it is NOT canon. This is a site for facts, not opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.68.231 (talk) 23:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The Marvel Universe is on a "floating timeline" or a "sliding timescale". For example, Flash Thompson from Spider-man went to Vietiam originally, but that's been changed to a later conflict make sense in the Marvel Sliding Timeline. The X-box example is another feature of this concept of a sliding timeline. As for the Classic X-men back up stories, that is canon as well, yet you have no argument for it. (Abaddon667 (talk) 01:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC))

First of all, there was no reason to copy and paste what we said on your talk page, and that may even be violating a rule. Second, I have never said any kind of argument against Classic X-Men, which is just reprintings of original issues anyway, so there was no reason to bring it up at all.68.49.68.231 (talk) 23:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, early issues Classic X-men also has new stories in it from the past, so I'm just saying it qualifies. I just felt this should be a public conversation is all, since this was already a subject debated over. Nothing personal. I'll take down our conversation if you want me too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abaddon667 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

“ This won't be a study in X-Men history but it'll definitely be part of the official X-continuity. ” — Scott Gray, Uncanny X-Men First Class Writer

Uncanny X-Men First Class is not an alternate universe.74.47.108.87 (talk) 04:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

“ Exploring in-continuity tales from the X-Men's past, WOLVERINE: FIRST CLASS is a must read for all X-Men fans! ” — Solicitation, Marvel.com

Wolverine: First Class is not an alternate universe.74.47.108.87 (talk) 04:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

All of Marvel's alternative universes are canon to the Marvel Universe, official alternative realities are all canon to themselves. The events of the alternative universes just take place in their own canon.

All events that occur in Ulimate Marvel are canon to Earth-1610, all events in Marvel Zombies are canon to Earth-2149 etc, they just have a seperate continuity to Earth-616. Even if it was a seperate universe, it would still be canon to whatever universe it is set in.

X-men and Wolverine First class titles are officially in-continuity (Earth-616). They're no more "alternate universe" than the current Astonishing X-men series. 86.96.226.20 (talk) 11:20, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Villains

As a major villain (ala Vulcan) and as recurring major villain teams and collective (ala Purifiers) shouldn't the following be included with the X-Men's Villains:

• Cassandra Nova
• Hellfire Club (comics), Phalanx (comics), and Brood (comics)? -Kez (talk) 01:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Unrelated to previous comment:

With Necrosha, and other previous storylines that established her very much a villain outside the Hellfire Club, shouldn't Selene get her own section under 'Villains'? -Kez (talk) 23:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

writers and artists

why insn't a section about the major writers and artists/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.25.252 (talk) 03:45, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Nutshell? Consensus with the Navboxes has been "Keep It Simple, Short". List the original creators and create a list article for everyone else. This avoids 1) the recurring argument over who's notable enough to be in the 'box and 2) the tendency to add everyone who's put word or image to the character/team.

By way example see {{Batman}} and {{Green Lantern}}.

With this 'box, a creators group could be added to the top. But it would have 3 listings — Lee, Kirby, List of.

(As an aside, the same variation of KISS would argue that individual member should not be listed — and the constant additions and removals there support that — nor should individual villains that are also part of listed teams.)

- J Greb (talk) 10:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay I see your logic and id think it should have Lee/Kirby and writers/artists but what about chris claremont i mean he basically set the standard for x-books —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.25.252 (talk) 05:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

That's the problem... if Claremont is included, then why not Cockrum, Bryne, Simonson, Hamma, Windsor-Smith, Jim Lee, Morrison, Weadon, and on and on and on. The shortest answer is the 3 items: Stan, Jack, and a list. And a list also allows for expanding on how the various writers and artists contributed to the characters and title. - J Greb (talk) 15:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't the fact that Claremont basically wrote X-Men and its spin-offs single-handedly for SIXTEEN YEARS count for anything? All Stan Lee did was write a thirty-odd issues of a series that eventually floundered; Claremont made it into the X-Behemoth it is today. No other writer's contribution compares. Let's give the guy some credit.Es-won (talk) 01:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

And Claremont would have had next to nil to play with in Lee hadn't been there.

As for the rest... both the floundering being linked to Lee and everyone else's work on the characters being subservient to Claremont comes across as apocryphal and "The fan wants his fave writer added".

If needed, and those POVs do need, a list article or a neutral article covering the ups and downs of the creative teams, sales, and popularity the X-books is in order. Such an article would likely start as an un-hyped tick off of what each of the writers and artists brought to the property. Such an article would be very relevant to add to this template.

But adding the bios of writers and artists beyond the two that "birthed" the concept? No, that's more clutter than this already hard to navigate template needs. - J Greb (talk) 02:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok but then why is there so many characters that are peoples favorites, and nearly all SIXTY x-men are there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.25.252 (talk) 05:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Wolverine

all about wolverine him and his villians —Preceding unsigned comment added by X venomtoxin 134 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Wolverine: First Class

Is there an actual Wolverine: First Class article on Wikipedia? Because I can't find one. Wolverine: First Class just redirects to X-Men: First Class, and the link in this template sends you to an article on the wolverine (the animal, not the comic character). -Rycr (talk) 08:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Marvel Noir, and other tidbits

• X-Men Noir isn't an on-going but a mini, so I reckon it don't really qualify to be in there.
• Mutant X (comics) should be added to the past alternate titles tab.
• Wolverine: Weapon X series is an on-going, and as such should be there since the main series and Origins are. If one worries that that tab is getting to big, well, Captain Britain & Co is leaving it soon (RIP) ):
• X-Men: Kingbreaker is not really that important to the X-universe, so probably should be removed from the list of major storylines. If that is kept we might as well put in The Rise and Fall of Shi'ar Empire and X-Men: Emperor Vulcan, which are kind of more important to the X-Men.

In my opinon the ones above are not too disagreeable, so I might as well do them anyway. The following though could be more problematic:

• Bishop (comics) should be in villains. He has been for at least a year, and just cos he once was an X-Man don't mean he is one now. There should be a certain level of continuity present in the template.
• On that note, some time ago the template had the list of all current X-Men in bold. I'd say that should be brought back. Possibly "embolden" all the X-Force and X-Factor members too (although not necessary X-Factor).
• With Utopia (comics) coming soon some of the character profiles and status will change, as well as the number of enemies will, well, increase. In particular where do the Dark X-Men fit in the template. (An aside, any help creating/editing/referencing all articles connected with Utopia crossover will be greatly appreciated)

User:Ermol(talk) 13 June 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 16:01, 13 June 2009 (UTC).

• The Noir thing is debatable, since there is a chance of Marvel doing more mini's, and that Wolverine has his own one coming out too, the link will take readers straight to the same page for both.
• Done.
• Done.
• Again, debatable, but since it's not something that affects more than one title, it can probably go.
• In case you haven't seen, there are several characters who have been both X-Men and X-Villains who are listed as both in the template. If you want to put Bishop under both, then go ahead, but do no remove him from the X-Men proper, where he has been known the most. In order to keep arguments down in the past of who belongs on the template and who doesn't, every X-Man, past and present, has been included in the X-Men list. The villain list could likely use some trimming down, like have those who would fit under one team be taken out and the team name left, but that's something debatable again. But...
• The bolding idea might work for current characters, only if it doesn't make the template even more busy than it already is. However I would not do anything for those who have been in X-Force and X-Factor, since they are not considered X-Men, another ongoing argument. But when you do this, would you do the same for villains? And where would you also have to do it for any of the other content? This is something that might be smart to get other opinions on before implementing it, so can it please be held off on for the time being?
• I don't know what you mean by how some of the character profiles will change or how what happens on their own personal pages will affect the template. The enemies list isn't likely to change much at all, except to maybe include the Dark Avengers in it, but that is something that we'll need to wait until the end of the crossover to see where they all stand at the time. The Dark X-Men have been put in the X-Universe section, since they don't have their own title like all other current teams, and the members aren't considered proper X-Men in the Marvel U yet, nor can they be classified by villains until we know what the true motives behind them are and what actions they will take, so they can stay there until we see what happens at the end of the crossover.68.49.68.231 (talk) 14:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

• Well by now, i think that they'd count as villains because they're basically the same team idea as Dark Avengers and they are considered villains in the Marvel U. We know that for most of them it was this or prison, and the few that didn't join because of this (that are still members) are mentally unstable so even though they don't know that they aren't villains that doesn't exclude them since about 1/2 of x-men villains don't consider what they're doing as wrong. However this shouldn't have another section for it because we've only seen about 7 to nine members, half who've left and their only villains are Simon Trask x-man and the x-men.
• OH and for the other question that will still apply to this template
• Bolding for characters may not work, simply because nearly half the members on the template are members from right now so it would look kind of wierd.
• I think that the members who've been villains or at least major villains should be in th bad-guy section. However I don't think all should count since many of the members are more well known as heroes. --Mutantkingmagneto (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)--

Split box

I am currently recommending a split of the template into several different navboxes including: Template:X-Men storylines; Template:X-Men characters; and Template:X-Men media. The current navbox is too large to effectively navigate through, breaking them up would provide more contextually specific navigation for the articles. Similar efforts have been done with Template:Batman. The current navbox links to a few hundred different subjects, on a few hundred different pages, this should bring the numbers into a more useful range. - Sharp962 (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC).

Yes to storylines and media, but no to characters. I feel that the characters are always an important part of the main box for any kind of franchise like this and that since they are the life of the franchise, they deserve to be there. If anything, I'd trim down the villains section and remove unimportant villains, i.e. ones that have been minor having been in only small amount of stories or too new to have done much, and/or villains that can fit under a team name.68.49.68.231 (talk) 20:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It relly looks like the template breaks into three categories:

• In-universe elements - Characters and "Universe"
• Publications - Titles and publications
• Other media

It also looks like the template should be split on those. Leave the in-universe stuff here, create {{X-Men Storylines}} and {{X-Men in other media}}, and then deal with the train-wreck the IOM section is. - J Greb (talk) 15:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually thought it would work best with 4 total, similar to that of those use in Batman. In-universe, Publication, and media ... and a trimmed version of the original for the actual X-Men page. -Sharp962 (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC).

{{X-Comics}} for storylines and {{X-Men media}} were create due to the consensus on this page. I still would like consideration for in-universe elements, and a pilot template was created. Any and all feedback would be appreciated - {X-Men characters}. -Sharp962 (talk) 04:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC).

I like the "Comics & arcs" and Media templates. But all that leaves here is essentially what you have in the characters 'box on you sandbox. It isn't needed. - J Greb (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with J Greb, the stuff that is under the "characters" template is essentially the main stuff for X-Men in general, so the main X-Men template can be edited around to fit that one, to make it similar to the main Batman one which you've referenced for this change. Though, the one thing I'm wondering about is if division by decades is necessary.68.49.68.231 (talk) 19:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so... just alphabetize the lists. This is to facilitate navigation, not provide information. - J Greb (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I used the years to create some order to such a massive lists of characters. Alphabetized is good, but I feel some sort of subheaders will create easier navigation. In the coming week, I'll look to replace templates for the Comics/arcs and media. -Sharp962 (talk) 15:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC).

Well, look at it this way, for normal everyday users on here, will they tend to know which decade their favorite character debuted in and look them up in the template that way, or would it be easier just to go straight for their name? In most cases, it's going to be the latter. That is usually why alphabetization is the most common way things are organized. One can go straight to the subject at hand and not have to know specifics behind them to be found. I've noticed the proposed template to replace the main one has been edited out of your sandbox, so I would like to propose one on my own and see how that will be taken. I will use the one you created and the Batman one you referenced for this split as references for the template. Also, I am going to propose that the {{X-Men television series}} and {{X-Men video games}} templates be merged into your {{X-Men media}} page. 68.49.68.231 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Comment: Given the enormous number of characters -- both hero and villain -- then duplicated because they appear in many comics as different reincarnations within different universes, in different tv shows through the years, in several movies, and in many video games, isn't a listing of these characters inside of a navbox that we hope to shorten/split a bit over the top? This isn't just one cartoon series where you have a half dozen characters that you see 90% of the time and twice as many villain-types or other characters, some of which you may only see once. This is an enormous cast of characters who have each been the focus at one time or another (within the comic book world, at least) through multiple timelines and universes. Such cast-group seems more fitting as just link in the navbox to a list (or lists) instead of attempting to list them all or picking and choosing who should and should not belong. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 04:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

As I have stated in this section as well as in the section above, the main reason that everyone who has been a main X-Man has been included on the list is to stop fights about who deserves to be there and who doesn't. If they've been on a mission with X-Men and been considered and called a member of the team in the pages of the book, then they're on the list. That's why characters who have helped them out, but been members of other teams or just students and not junior X-Men at the time are not kept on the list. As for the villains, I have agreed time and again that that section is too large. I'm going to propose a trimmed down one after the split that Sharp has proposed, and first, I'm going to split that into two sections; Villains and villain teams. Anyone who is known for being a member of a villain team, but has not been known for major acts on their own outside of the team, will not be kept as a singular villain in the villains section. For example, Magneto will likely stay on the villains section even though he's led the Brotherhood on several occasions because he's fought the X-Men many times on his own but characters like Toad, Destiny, Pyro, etc will not and just be linked to on the Brotherhood link. However, say, Sebastian Shaw will not be kept on villains section because he hasn't done anything while not being affiliated with the Hellfire Club. Also, as you have referenced, there are many villains included in the current list that have only appeared a handful of times or less, or not appeared in a major storyline, that I would like to remove. For example, does Lucifer really need to be included since he only appeared once, when he fought the X-Men and it was revealed he was the one who crippled Xavier. I will work on this proposed template and place it up here when finished.68.49.68.231 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Template Proposal: As promised, you can find my take on how to restructure the main template here. There will likely be more changes in the future when I've reviewed things more, as there are with just about any restructuring, but I think this is a good base to start off with and would like to use this for the main template now that the others have been created.68.49.68.231 (talk) 15:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

What if all the charcters were dropped like in {{Avengers}}, and a simple members list was left? -Sharp962 (talk) 17:14, 6 September 2009 (UTC).

Well, I think that one only really works because it has all of the titles still in there as well, so users can go to the title that has the character they want, instead of searching the whole list, and we've broken those X-Men ones off in a separate template now. Having them all there is convenient to users who don't want to search a long list, and keeps down arguments of who deserves to be there and who doesn't. Plus, this template has had the character list up for so long, what's to stop others from trying to put them back up? I think this is just more convenient for users overall.68.49.68.231 (talk) 17:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I would like to get this finalized as soon as possible since this proposed split has been going on for almost a month and changing this template is the last thing left, so if there are no objections by tomorrow, I'm going to slim down this template, and move ahead with the merges I've proposed.68.49.68.231 (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Members

The members section is too long for the fact that we already have an article about it. I suggest trimming it and showing the more well known characters. Jhenderson777 (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that the members who're still actually members at the moment should be there. The extra squads that aren't really considered x-men like most of the new mutants and the younger kids at the moment should be taken off. --Mutantkingmagneto (talk) 05:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Brotherhood of Mutants

I was just wondering since we can't seem to store the Brotherhood characters in this template. Maybe the characters are important enough for their own template. I am thinking if the group if the group is large enough to have their own members page they can have their own template. What is your thoughts. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd oppose that. The list is fine for purposes here. And there is another work around... - J Greb (talk) 22:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Which should be up now in a test size. - J Greb (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I totally agree. And I think what you did on the template is a really great idea. And probably need be done on other large templates such as Template:Legion of Super-Heroes for example. Jhenderson777 (talk) 00:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

New Mutants

Do New Mutants count as X-Men members too. I would understand if they didn't. But since you seem to let Dark X-Men members count. One could never know. Jhenderson777 (talk) 23:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The general rule that has usually been followed is that secondary team members are usually not included because they usually have their own thing going on outside of the main X-Men and usually under different leadership than someone at the school. Like X-Factor used to be run by the government and now are their own detective agency. And X-Force used to be run by Cable off on his own without having to work by the X-Men's rules. However, most of the New Mutants are already included because they have been upgraded to X-Men at some point. I think the only members who aren't on there are Cypher, Warlock, and Wolfsbane. It may be a good idea to have a vote on whether or not to add another column for secondary teams, but not adding the members of each team to keep the template size down. Though the main argument I could think of against them is that they are all likely linked to in the X-Comics template since they're all their own books as well. As for the Dark X-Men, they're only included if they've been X-Men or major villains in the past. The team was included since they factored into a major arc and had their own series, and were put into the miscellanea section when they debuted since they weren't considered real X-Men or major villains at the time. Since they were last seen fully working under Osborn, they can probably be moved to villain teams now.68.49.68.231 (talk) 23:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I understand your reasoning. I also think of Tabitha Smith as another New Mutant character to mention. Jhenderson777 (talk) 00:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I am fairly certain that Boom Boom is at least a reserve member of the X-Men as of Utopia, so I think she deserves a spot on the template. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Todd landreth (talk • contribs) 04:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep, Boom-Boom is an official X-Men member (not even just a reservist), per Marvel's Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z, vol. 13 hardcover.

And since I didn't really address the main question before, the New Mutants are no longer a separate team--it's been clearly established in the current New Mutants series and in Marvel's handbooks that Cannonball, under Cyclops as the current leader of all of the X-Men, is now in charge of a squad of X-Men that's informally referred to as the "New Mutants." They've been called X-Men repeatedly, they were the X-Men's beta team at the beginning of the "Second Coming" storyline, and they're all listed as full members of the X-Men in Marvel's handbook series. DeadpoolRP (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Adding Recent Members, etc.

Okay, because I know these kinds of changes are sometimes considered "controversial" and are often quickly reverted, I'm about to add some X-Men members to the list on the template, so I'm giving my reasons here first. So PLEASE do not revert any or all of this without similarly discussing your reasons here. And, just as an added note, for now I'm not even going to add ALL of the current members--just members whose membership I can verify at the moment from multiple sources.

First of all, I'm adding Vulcan, Mystique, and Sabretooth. I realize that in the past the reason given for removing these characters was that they're also listed in the villains section. However, Magneto and Juggernaut have been listed in both places for a while now and no one has reverted it, so for the purpose of consistency, I'm adding these three back as well. If anyone decides to remove them again, please either remove Magneto and Juggernaut as well or give your reasons here for not removing those two!

Second, I'm adding Magik, Cypher, and Warlock because, as I said above, "it's been clearly established in the current New Mutants series and in Marvel's handbooks that Cannonball, under Cyclops as the current leader of all of the X-Men, is now in charge of a squad of X-Men that's informally referred to as the 'New Mutants.' They've been called X-Men repeatedly, they were the X-Men's beta team at the beginning of the 'Second Coming' storyline, and they're all listed as full members of the X-Men in Marvel's handbook series." In case anyone needs the info, Magik officially joined the team in New Mutants (vol. 3) #1 (2009) and Cypher and Warlock joined in New Mutants (vol. 3) #9 (2010). And all of this information was verified by Marvel in Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z, vol. 13 (2010).

Finally, I'm adding Ariel to the list. She has similarly been confirmed an official X-Men member in Marvel's handbooks, and she was made the teleporter for the X-Men's alpha squad (as was Magik before her) during "Second Coming," further confirming her (and Magik's) status as full X-Men members.

Also, why is Xorn only on the list once? There were two separate Xorns on the team, and both members named Marvel Girl/Phoenix are on the list (albeit each with their most recent codename), as well as both Thunderbirds (with parenthetical clarification), etc. Unless someone has VERY strong feelings about this and gives a good reason why we shouldn't, I think we should change Xorn to Kuan-Yin Xorn and Shen Xorn. DeadpoolRP (talk) 19:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, for those concerned about the list taking up too much space, my edits so far haven't made the list any larger, spacially speaking; however, there ARE several characters currently on the list who could be eliminated. To begin with, I propose removing Caliban and Nate Grey, since both have only been on substitute teams or sub-groups: Caliban was only on the X-Men's X-Force strike team, and X-Man was only on the 1999 "Mannite Rescue X-Men" in the second Astonishing X-Men miniseries (though it looks like he'll probably be joining the main X-Men team following "Second Coming"--but that hasn't happened yet). Thoughts? DeadpoolRP (talk) 20:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The double listings of characters has been discussed before, I know because I was a major part of it. It may have been in user talk pages or in edit summaries, since I don't see it on here anymore, but I know it was talked about it because I had some very long talks about it. I think Mags and Juggs were left on both since they skirted the line with long runs on both sides of the coin. We can go ahead and knock them both down to just villains, since that seems to be main side most people will remember them on, or we can keep them both on the side of good since Mags is now aligned with the X-Men and Juggs is trying to go good again with the Thunderbolts. I'll keep them to the villains side, unless someone finds it necessary to move them back to the heroes.

The New Mutants thing, I'm actually working on something to put a listing for the secondary teams and work in a similar way to the Brotherhood listing. I'm going to explain more in a new section.

The argument for Ariel seems to draw a lot of parallels to when people argue about including M. As said on her page, Ariel volunteered to help out the X-Men and not really said to being an actual member of the team itself. And much like M, just helping them out on occasion doesn't always mean that they are full X-Men themselves. If just helping them out on a couple missions when they're available is enough to make someone an X-Man, then the lists would would be a lot longer. And from what I'm seeing on various talk pages, like the List of X-Men members page and the Wikipedia Comics page, more users seem to be leaning towards not just going off of what the handbooks say and sticking to how things are stated in the comics themselves.

I'm fine with the Xorn change.

Caliban has been considered an X-Man since the Extremists arc of Uncanny during Ed Brubaker's run. I believe he may have had an X on his uniform when he went with them back to the tunnels, and he was included in the team list when they tried to restart the inclusion of the little heads in the upper left corner of the covers at that time. I believe he may have made a brief appearance with the team during one of the events going on at the time before Messiah Complex started. Either way, he's been with them before he was a part of X-Force. This is an example of why we tend to not use the handbooks as sources since they obviously don't include his membership since the Extremists arc. Nate can stay too, since besides that mini, whenever I've seen him reference in the books since then, he's always been considered a member.68.49.68.231 (talk) 01:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The villain switch you made is fine with me. I too remember seeing that discussion somewhere, and like I said, it just needed to be consistent one way or the other--all on both lists or all on one list.

I think what a lot of people are missing is that Marvel has established in both their comics and in their handbooks that the X-Men are no longer just a small(ish), close-knit group of heroes. Instead, they're now an expansive army with LOTS of members (as has been mentioned both by X-Men members and by villains). In particular, the so-called "New Mutants" are no longer just a group that's related to but not part of the X-Men--they're full X-Men members and shouldn't be in some kind of sub-group section. They often work together as a squad, but as can be seen in several instances (Cannonball and Karma's recent involvement in several main X-Men missions, Magik's inclusion in the alpha squad, Cannonball's leadership of the Hellbound squad, etc.), they're "just" X-Men like everyone else.

I too got the impression that Caliban was going to become an X-Men member when he appeared in the corner box of Uncanny X-Men for one issue, but nowhere does it say a corner box appearance an X-Man makes. Heck, villains have appeared in corner boxes before! Who knows, maybe the original plan was to make him a member of the team but then there ended up not being enough time before "Messiah Complex," his inclusion in X-Force, and his death all happened (and they all happened right in a row--there was nothing between "The Extremists" and "Messiah Complex"). But I just don't understand why a corner box appearance and helping the X-Men find Masque (i.e., "helping them out on occasion"--your words) makes Caliban an X-Men member while helping out on SEVERAL missions and being included in the X-Men's ALPHA SQUAD (not to mention being listed as a member in the handbook, as well as a status quo change demonstrated in-story and explained in Marvel's official indexes and handbooks) isn't enough for Ariel.

No offense, but it seems like you're making completely opposite arguments to suit your personal preference for each character. Marvel made the corner boxes as much as they made the handbooks (and it's their prerogative to interpret whether a corner box inclusion means membership or not), and if you only want to judge things based on in-story references, then a corner box inclusion is no more "in-story" than a handbook entry is. Now, if you reread "The Extremists" arc and find it clearly stated that Caliban's an X-Men member--and maybe even if you just find an X on his uniform (though the Cuckoos and all of the other trainees have those and it isn't enough to make them full X-Men)--I might reconsider. But I don't think you'll find either of those things.

Similarly, please give me one example of where Nate Grey has been called an X-Men member in-story during an X-Men mission other than in the second Astonishing X-Men miniseries. The only other time I can remember him even appearing with the team was in the Danger Room right before Astonishing X-Men, when Professor X was announcing that the X-Men were disbanding, not recruiting. So I'm not sure why you can authoritatively decide that "Nate can stay too" based on what you remember of comics from 9+ years ago, while my inclusion of members who are clearly stated in-story to be members of the X-Men's alpha and beta squads is called into question. Please tell me that you understand what I'm saying here. DeadpoolRP (talk) 02:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

MY problem is that it seems redundant that characters are on the template more than once. Mystique and Magneto were already on there twice considering the Brotherhood subtemplate. Since characters like Mystique, Juggernaut, Magneto, and Xorn are more well known as antagonists of X-Men than actual members it would be nicer if they are just in the villain sections. There is just too many villains on the members sections which are only members in certain circumstances. Jhenderson777 (talk) 19:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Magneto is currently a member of the X-Men. Just so everyone knows —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagle2ch (talk • contribs) 08:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Secondary teams

One of the issues I've seen recently regarding membership is how the various secondary teams fit in, like X-Force and New Mutants. With the restarting of those teams and having them more closely related to the X-Men then ever before, the line has become somewhat blurrier as to including them in the template as official members or not. So, I'm working on putting up a section for the secondary teams, and to that we will work on putting in a similar set up for several of those teams like we currently have with the Brotherhood of Mutants. That set up is, while many of the Brotherhood members are well known, they haven't been relevant enough outside of the team as a single villain to warrant a separate inclusion on the list, but another user made a set up so that when you visit their page, they'll show up on the template with the incarnation of the team they're most known for, but not show up on pages other than those in that incarnation. It allows them to be included in the template, but keeps the size of the template down, which has been another big issue with this template in the past. A similar thing would be done with the secondary teams. It will allow characters like Warlock, Cypher, and Vanisher to be included in the template under those teams even though there's arguments that can go against them. It will draw a middle ground to hopefully make all parties happy. I've already contacted user:J Greb, who did the set up for the Brotherhood team, about this, and when I have a response from him, I hope to move forward with this. 68.49.68.231 (talk) 02:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The training squad members included in the list (Anole, Blindfold, Cipher, Dust, Elixir, Gentle, Graymalkin, Hellion, Ink, Mercury, Prodigy, Rockslide, Surge, and Wolf Cub) are more of a secondary team than full members like the New Mutants, so I'd say that they should be relegated to secondary status in the template before anyone else. And you'd need to add the other trainees (Bling!, Indra, Loa, Match, Onyxx, the Cuckoos, and Trance). But I think it'd be fine to add X-Club member (Yuriko Takiguchi and Kavita Rao) and X-Force members (Wolfsbane, Caliban, Elixir, and Vanisher) who've never been full X-Men to the list in secondary spots. DeadpoolRP (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC).

Weird, why didn't that last comment auto date? Did I leave off a tilde or something? DeadpoolRP (talk) 03:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The students that are already on the list are indeed X-Men. The ones added during the run of New X-Men were, as I was reminded on several occasions during arguments over it, called X-Men on several occasions through Yost and Kyle's run, with the biggest specific mention happening during Messiah Complex, I believe, when Scott puts the kids against the Marauders. The Young X-Men were in the same boat, after the first arc, when Cyclops decides to keep them together with Dani and Sunspot as their appointed leaders with him saying specifically that they won't be leading a teaching squad, but a fighting force. This is also when Sunspot has been considered being a full X-Man and not just a New Mutant. 68.49.68.231 (talk) 04:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's funny you should say that, because the "New Mutants" that are already on the list are indeed X-Men. They have been called X-Men on several occasions through their current series, with the biggest specific mention happening during Second Coming, I believe, when Scott sends them against Cameron Hodge and his forces and calls them the beta X-Men team. So I guess we'll just have to keep both the trainees and the New Mutants on the main list, since they're given the same status in-story (and Cannonball's squad is given higher status in the handbooks--a higher status that's clearly demonstrated in the confrontation between the two groups that happened in New Mutants [vol. 3] #1). :) DeadpoolRP (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

As I've already posted elsewhere, if anyone needs more evidence that the "New Mutants" squad members are all full X-Men (not a separate team) now, here's just one of many examples--a quotation from page 11 of last week's New Mutants (vol. 3) #15 (September 2010). Cyclops (the current leader of all things X-Men) says to Cannonball (the leader of the "New Mutants" squad of X-Men): "Take your X-Men on a recreational leave. I want you gone by morning." This is just one of MANY examples throughout the series (as well as other X-books) showing that the New Mutants are all X-Men now, despite a lot of people on Wikipedia apparently not wanting them to be. Similarly, Domino and Boom-Boom have been on the X-Men for months now, so I'm adding them to the template: Domino has been on both covert missions with the secret X-Force squad AND open missions with the main (i.e., NOT secret, thus NOT X-Force) X-Men; Boom-Boom has been on several missions throughout the "Utopia," "Nation X," and "Second Coming" storylines, including fighting against Predator Xs, Nimrods, Osborn's Avengers and X-Men, etc.; and both have been identified as X-Men members by Marvel. DeadpoolRP (talk) 02:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I've added Box and Doctor Nemesis to the list based on several sources: They've both attended Utopia's "core X-Men members" meetings (in Nation X #1 and assorted Uncanny X-Men issues); they've both fought to defend Utopia against attacks (against Norman Osborn's Avengers and X-Men in Dark Avengers/Uncanny X-Men: Exodus, against Emplate in X-Men Legacy, etc.), as opposed to just taking part in X-Club research and missions; and both have been listed as core members in Marvel's handbooks. So if anyone feels the need to remove them from the list, be sure to discuss it here first. DeadpoolRP (talk) 12:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I've added the secondary teams article finally, but have not heard from the other user for putting up members lists like have been done for the Brotherhood on this template. As said in the edit summary, I'll remove this myself if I can not get it to work out.68.55.153.254 (talk) 21:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Membership

If you're going to list New Mutants and other affiliated mutants that were never officially X-Men per se, then you should really just make the nav box bigger and include subsections for the secondary groups (i.e. New Mutants, X-Factor, Uncanny X-Force, etc.). I recently createda New Mutants Template that could easily be added as a sub group. Same could be done for X-Factor and the other groups.

We should really take a polll on this and come to some conclusion.Vaf2675 (talk) 08:41, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by saying these characters were never members unless you just plain don't know about their history. But fine, I'll take it one by one if that will finally satisfy it:

Caliban - Joined in the Extremists arc in Uncanny and stayed with them until his death in Messiah Complex.

Chamber and Husk - The common thread in some of your arguments seems to be that if they were in previous teams, that they were never upgraded to X-Men, which shows you just plain don't know or you're willfully ignoring it. Chamber joined somewhere before Uncanny X-Men #400 and stayed with them until he went undercover in the Weapon X series and was used as a spy for them, still maintaining his contact with the team. Husk I don't know how you missed due to her rather controversial relationship with Angel during her tenure, joined around issue 422 of Uncanny, and after a few arcs where she was heavily featured, has appeared sporadically since the reload, but still as a member, since then.

Changeling - Was given membership by Xavier himself when he asked him to mimic him while he left to prepare for the invasion he saw coming. This has never really been something that has been not taken as canon.

Cloak & Dagger - were made members after they turned their back on Osborne and his Dark X-Men at the end of the Utopia crossover and were seen as members in the mini-series with the Agents of Atlas.

Deadpool - Was finally given membership at during a recent arc in his own series where he set out to join them. It was more a pity membership just so Cyclops wouldn't be bothered by it anymore from what I understand, but it's considered legit and canon by Marvel ever since.

Karma, Mirage, Magma, Sunspot - Again, you need to look up more of their histories. Karma joined after Uncanny #500 when she helped to take down the Hellfire Cult and had been shown sporadically helping the X-Men in various ways up through to the newest New Mutants book. Mirage joined after she left X-Force when it turned to more of a black ops unit back around X-Men #102 and had been said to have joined during the Six Month Gap. Magma was brief member of the X-treme X-Men during that series, which are considered official X-Men like with Lifeguard and Slipstream. Sunspot joined when he took over as an instructor for the Young X-Men during that series' short run, which would also add more to Mirage's credibility of being an X-Man. As has also been told to you before, this current team of New Mutants ARE considered X-Men in the books as they are the team that Cyclops gave Cannonball permission to gather as an field team of X-Men, which would include Majik, Warlock, and Cypher.

Petra and Sway - Yes, they are members. They may have died on their first mission, but they still died as X-Men. Or would you want to not include the original Thunderbird, who died on one of his first missions too?

All the students from New X-Men and Young X-Men - Yes, they actually are considered X-Men. Through both the runs of their books, they are repeatedly referred to as the younger team of X-Men and during Young X-Men Cyclops even stated to Dani and Sunspot that he needed them to take over the leaders of this new team of X-Men.

And as far as the templates, what real purpose do they serve? I'm trying to work with another user so that the secondary teams will be featured on this template much like the way the Brotherhood members are. They will appear on the template on their various personal pages, but not on others so as not to glut the template with all their names. That takes up their members part of what those other templates would offer, and everything else you have on there, story arcs and a history link, are already satisfied by the X-Comics template. They're not necessary and only serve as something else someone can stick on a page just to have it there. 68.55.153.254 (talk) 12:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

There seem to be a lot of members missing and a lot of characters who are either inactive or dead currently in the list. I attempted to edit this but what I changed was changed back. and by edit this i don't mean I would remove those who are dead or inactive, but I think separating them from the current lineup would be helpful to avoid confusing. I find it quite odd that the lis on the actual x-men page barely resembles the list of members on the Template.eagle2ch (talk) 1:49, 2 August 2010

Eagle2ch, this is just a general list of X-Men members with no regard to their current status, and lots of people are already complaining that the template is too large. So splitting the list into two lists (current and former members) is just going to make it even bigger, which is probably one of the reasons why your edits are being reverted. Also, you should always discuss major changes like yours here on the talk page and try to reach a consensus before actually making the changes, so the fact that you haven't been doing this (and you haven't even been putting much in your edit summaries!) is probably another reason your changes were reverted.

You should also read the talk page before making major changes to see if the kinds of changes you're about to make have already been discussed and decided on. If you had done that, you would have seen that the issue of villains and former villains has already been discussed several times, and it's been decided that if a villain is already on the template in the villains section and is better known as a villain (Magneto, Juggernaut, Sabretooth, Mystique, etc.), they're left out of the X-Men member list. This is another effort to keep the size of the template down, as well as to avoid repetition.

I realize that there are still several members missing from the list (Aurora, Box, Danger, Fantomex, Doctor Nemesis, and possibly Hope Summers, though she may be considered part of the training squad--we'll have to wait and see), as well as some characters that are included in the list whose membership status is questionable (Caliban, Deadpool, Nate Grey, some training squad members). I've been slowly adding members of the main X-Men team to the list, but only when I have time to gather up enough evidence of their membership and present it here, because additions tend to be speedily reverted if they're not backed up on the talk page (due, I'm sure, to the team's size). Members who've only been on a temporary X-Men squad (the Muir Island, Phalanx Invasion, and Mannite Rescue squads, for example) or an X-Men sub-group (Dr. Rao and Dr. Takiguchi of X-Club; Wolfsbane and Vanisher of X-Force; Onyxx, Bling!, the Cuckoos, etc., of the training squad, for example) are generally left off of the list, though I'm not worried enough about it to deal with the arguments that would result if I were to remove the training squad members currently on the list (New X-Men, etc.). On the other hand, the list on the main X-Men page is a list of current members (and includes current sub-groups); if you want a more extensive, detailed list, see the List of X-Men members page.

So, if after all that you still have changes you want to make, I'd strongly suggest discussing them here on the talk page first and seeing what others think of your changes (especially if they're formatting changes). Or at least back them up here on the talk page before making them (especially if they involve adding to or removing from the characters on the list). I'll be sure to keep an eye on this talk page and address any of your comments when I get a chance. I hope all of this helps! DeadpoolRP (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Bling!, Trance, Loa, Indra, Stepford Cuckoos, Match and other X-Men in training should be added becouse many of them took part in X-Men mission, like Trance in Necrosha, Loa and Indra in Collision, Match in Utopia, Bling! in Utopia and versus Emplate, Onyxx in Utopia and Necrosha, No-Girl in Nation-X or Stepford Cuckoos in several misions in San Francisco and Utopia. And I think the same about Magneto, the group of Eve of destruction(Frenzy, Omerta, Sunpyre, Wraith), Madelyne Pryor in the Fall of the Mutants and in Australia, Legion in Second Coming, Aurora in Secret Invasion, Mystique and Sabretooth in the team with Rogue, Iceman, Cannonball, Sentinel Omega and Lady Mastermind, Fantomex and EVA in New X-Men vol 1, Nation-X, Second Coming and Uncanny X-Force, Vulcan in Deadly Genesis, Hope Summers in Second Coming and the Five Lights and Pulse in several times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.99.155.40 (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

There are several problems with just about all those characters that have been discussed throughout the talk page. Some are already listed as villains which they are more known for than brief runs as heroes. Some were kidnapped or just happened to be there when they were attacked so of course they had to fight, which doesn't make them members. That and just flat out helping the X-Men in general doesn't automatically make someone a member. If that were all it took, then half the marvel universe would be X-Men.68.55.153.254 (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, let's look at all of the characters you suggest, individually or in small groups:

Bling!, Trance, Loa, Indra, the Stepford Cuckoos, Match, and other X-Men-In-Training: I believe that the official stance on these characters is that they're students and therefore not full members, so they get left off of the list like characters who are only members of the X-Club (Dr. Rao) or X-Force (Wolfsbane, Vanisher). However, there is some contention over this point. For example, all of the New X-Men and Young X-Men characters are on the list because some contributors argue that they're called "full X-Men" in the comics and therefore belong on the list. I don't disagree strongly enough to remove them from the list myself and cause contention/argument, but I also don't plan on adding the rest of the trainees myself. However, if you feel strongly about it, all you'd have to do is find instances where they've been specifically called "X-Men" (Trance in "Hellbound," Indra and Loa in "Collision," etc.). Be sure to discuss it here before you add them to the template, citing specific issues (not just general storylines, like you've been doing), etc., and I don't see how people can argue with you (as long as you discuss and source it thoroughly), considering all of the New and Young X-Men characters already included . . .

No-Girl: Not all students are automatically X-Men-In-Training. If they don't have uniforms, haven't been in training sessions and on mission, etc., like Ernst and No-Girl, they definitely don't belong on the list. No-Girl battling Kid Omega in a mental battle the X-Men didn't know about beforehand doesn't count as being an X-Man or taking part in an X-Men mission, you know?

Magneto, Juggernaut, Mystique, Sabretooth, Lady Mastermind, Vulcan, Kuan-Yin Xorn, and Danger: All of these characters are already on the template: the first seven in the role they're better known as (villains) and Danger in the "Equipment & Vehicles" section in her better known role as the Danger Room. The template's already big enough that we don't want characters on it twice. (Actually, I misspoke: Lady Mastermind already is on the template as an X-Men member since she hasn't been a significant enough villain to be in the villains section.)

The X-Men group from "Eve of Destruction" (Frenzy, Omerta, Sunpyre, Wraith): This X-Men lineup (as well as the New Mutants Graduate X-Men, Muir Island X-Men, Phalanx Invasion X-Men, Mannite Rescue X-Men, and Street Team X-Men) is considered a temporary substitute X-Men group, so they don't have full membership status and don't go on the template (except for those members who have also been full X-Men).

Madelyne Pryor: Madelyne Pryor and Gateway have both been listed as X-Men members in Marvel's handbooks, so I wouldn't be opposed to their inclusion (though it would have to be discussed and sourced first). However, now that I look back at the template, Madelyne's already on it as a villain, so she shouldn't be included in the members list too.

Legion: It's as yet unclear what the official status of the Utopia residents who helped out during "Second Coming" (Legion, Avalanche, Random, Scalphunter, Litterbug, Sack, and arguably Toad, etc.) will be. According to Cyclops, they're X-Men of some kind, but I'm not sure if they're considered full members or just substitute members like the ones discussed above. I'd wait to add them until we get some kind of clarification or see if any of them stick around and take part in future missions.

Aurora: Yep, Aurora's a member and joined the team during "Secret Invasion," and she's been listed as a member in Marvel's handbooks, so I'll be adding her to the template eventually. In fact, I'm going to add her right now. She was one of many new recruits who joined and battled alongside the team after it re-formed in San Francisco, joining the team in Secret Invasion: X-Men #2 (2008). Her membership has been confirmed in several of Marvel's handbooks, including volume 13 of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z hardcover series and the recent Women of Marvel handbook. And if you have any questions about the ability of handbooks to clarify events (and even add new information) as directed by Marvel's writers and editors, please read this entry in the handbooks' FAQs: http://marvel.com/universe/OHOTMU%3AFAQ#How_do_you_go_about_writing_each_profile.3F As usual, I've followed the preferred procedure here of explaining my changes before making them, so please do the same (citing sources, etc.) if you want to change this.

Fantomex and E.V.A.: While these two were only substitute members when they were on the Street Team in New X-Men, vol. 1, I believe that like Boom-Boom, Ariel, Domino, etc., with the X-Men's current status quo, they've qualified as full X-Men members during the "Nation X" and "Second Coming" storylines, so I'll eventually be adding them as well (together as "Fantomex & E.V.A.," like "Cloak & Dagger," so they're not on the template twice).

Hope Summers and the "Five Lights": We'll have to wait and see if Hope (and the "Five Lights") are eventually classified as X-Men-In-Training or full X-Men. It's too early to add the Five Lights to the template, but it would be easy to justify Hope's inclusion since she's been on an X-Men squad throughout the "Five Lights" storyline, and she even introduced the group by saying, "We're the X-Men." Just be sure to discuss it and cite it here before adding her. This week's Origins of Marvel Comics: X-Men #1 has the following quote about Hope: "After proving herself in battle, Hope watched her surrogate father make the ultimate sacrifice, then took her place with the X-Men." So between that and the Uncanny X-Men #526 quote above ("We're the X-Men"), I'm going to add her to the template. And there are some similar clarifying quotes about Magik, Cannonball (and the other New Mutants), Domino, and Jubilee being X-Men members in the X-Men Origins one-shot, for those who still don't want to recognize them as full X-Men . . .

Pulse: Pulse was never called an X-Man and has never been included on any X-Men membership list. Sorry. He just came along with Mystique and helped out, which doesn't make him a member. Really the only way he'd get added to the list is if a later writer specifically says in a story that he had been a member (or, obviously, if he joined the team at some future date).

Thoughts/comments/differing opinions? DeadpoolRP (talk) 02:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and add Fantomex and E.V.A. onto the membership list. As I mentioned above, I'm going to follow the lead of how Cloak and Dagger, the other members who share a single Wikipedia page, were added by listing them together; however, I'm not positive that that's the best way to list them (or Cloak & Dagger), so I'm open to suggestions. Anyway, my rationale for adding them:

1.) Fantomex has fulfilled all of the current requirements for X-Men membership, per Marvel's handbooks and the explanation given in the X-Men section of the recent Official Index to Marvel Universe series: He joined the X-Men for a mission (in New York, against Sublime's associates), brought that squad back to Utopia, stayed on Utopia, and defended Utopia and San Francisco throughout the "Second Coming" storyline. Heck, he's fought alongside the X-Men more than other current members, including Aurora, Boom-Boom, Danger, etc.

2.) In Uncanny X-Men #521, when Fantomex is transporting the X-Men squad he assisted back to Utopia, he telepathically talks to Cyclops via Emma Frost and ends the conversation by saying "X-Men, out," including himself with the group.

3.) If you look at the (main) cover of Uncanny X-Men #522, every other character on the cover is an X-Men member (with Rockslide being an X-Men-in-Training member), so it seems odd to include Fantomex if he's not a member.

4.) Even before Cyclops's declaration during the "Second Coming" storyline that everyone on Utopia was a combatant and an X-Man, Fantomex was already defending the island alongside the X-Men.

5.) Fantomex has also joined Wolverine's new X-Force squad, but since that team's a secret team (even from Cyclops!), Fantomex's continuing exploits with the main X-Men obviously can't be seen as X-Force missions.

6.) Even after he joined X-Force, Fantomex has continued his involvement with the X-Men, including in the most recent issue of Uncanny X-Men, where he and E.V.A. helped Emma Frost and Kitty Pryde sneak Sebastian Shaw off of Utopia, and he continues to appear prominently on the covers of upcoming issues.

7.) He got his own story in the recent X-Men: To Serve and Protect #1 anthology, which ended with him telling the police that he was returning the diamond he and Batroc were fighting over "in the name of the X-Men."

All of these things point to his membership.

Also, while I'm adding things, I'll be adding two X-Men secondary teams to the template: Generation X and X-Terminators. Generation X members were official Xavier students who had their own series for 75 issues, and several of them have gone on to become X-Men (Emma Frost, Chamber, Husk). And I know one contributor called the X-Terminators "too minor" to include, but I don't really see why: In addition to "X-Terminators" being the original superhero team name for the original X-Factor lineup, the formation and training of the second X-Terminators team (X-Factor's young wards/trainees) was a major subplot for most of the original X-Factor team's run. They were to X-Factor what the New Mutants were to the X-Men, and they got their own miniseries and were prominently featured in a major X-Men crossover ("Inferno"). And it's not like there's a shortage of space in the secondary teams section! So I'm going to add them back to the list, at least until someone can explains in a bit more detail why they're too minor. (Plus, the X-Terminators page is pretty weak, so maybe linking to them in the template will get them more exposure and inspire someone to improve on that article.) DeadpoolRP (talk) 13:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I think after 'Collision' (X-Men Legacy # 238-241), it would be fair to include, at the least, Indra and Loa in the list right? Especially as they were given equal status in the arc as Anole, who is included. It would be a bit of a stretch to still classify them as just "X-Men in Training" now that the two, especially Indra, are setup to play significant parts in the future as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.36.152 (talk) 15:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Dark X-Men

Just a heads up that I'm changing "Dark X-Men" in the template to "Norman Osborn's X-Men." Since they were never actually called the Dark X-Men in the comics (that was just the series name), this reflects both in-story events and the way Marvel's handbooks have handled the team. DeadpoolRP (talk) 01:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Why is Legion listed as a villain?

Okay, so I'm biased in that I dislike when autistic are portrayed as generally dangerous, but as far as I understand he doesn't have villainous motivations in himself. He's just been catatonic and emotionally retarded, and is not used as a villain nowadays. There are plenty of considerably more morally dubious characters listed under the members section. Of course, his stray thoughts and dreams automatically affect reality, but that would turn into a mess for anybody. David A (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

A lot of X-Men villains are that way. Vulcan is a villain. Proteus is a villain. I see no reason for that to change. Not to mention that there's been consensus on this issue against your viewpoint (which is, in your own words, biased). Friginator (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Vulcan and Proteus have malevolent intentions, whereas Legion doesn't. His stray thoughts automatically affect reality, that's all, and is currently a member. Can you direct me towards the consensus that you talk about?. Also, I'm no different from yourself in being biased. I simply honestly admit it, since it should ideally help to get somewhere useful. It might be an idea to move him and other non-central characters to a "supporting characters" section though. David A (talk) 09:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Before I address the main issue: I'm as biased as you are? Seriously? You openly said that you're biased towards this character because he's autistic (like you, if I get your meaning there), not to mention that you go completely bonkers whenever any fictional character shares your name. I can't think of a more biased person than someone who may in fact actually think he is the character he's talking about. I, on the other hand, have no perceived "personal" connection with the subject of the article or the organization of the template. It's about comic books. Plain and simple. Anyway, the consensus is to keep this to "Heroes" and "Villains" lists, and Legion is clearly treated as the antagonist in the majority of the stories he's in. In others he's simply treated as a plot device. How many stories can you name where he is clearly and definitively a protagonist? If you wanted to change the labeling of the "villains" section to antagonists, that would be fine. Friginator (talk) 17:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

You are the one who keeps going hate-spewing bonkers on me remember? And Legion is extremely different from myself. He's comicbook autistic, i.e. treated completely off, and although mpd is a better designation, it doesn't work like that at all either. Anyway, ignoring your neverending acid, his own personality is never treated as a villain, but plot device or antagonist through all of those personalities living inside his head, sure. He has been treated as a protagonist recently though.

But yes, I stand by supporting character, and if the likes of Frenzy, who is an outright murderous psychopath terrorist, is listed as a member nowadays, then Legion isn't even within leagues of as amoral as she is. David A (talk) 17:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

What do reliable sources say about the matter? --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know. Neither I think. Is there a listing somewhere?

Age Of X and the followup starring Legion seemed to state that he in himself is a wannabe hero, but that having to deal with all of those personalities running around, his emotional immaturity, and inpractically vast power simply makes him a non-villainous mostly benevolent supporting character with mental problems. Or that's the way that I read it, or at least he comes across as the odd man out lumped in with the rest of the villains. Some of his fully separate sub-personalities are definitely villainous though. David A (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

First of all, Legion is not autistic, he has multiple-personality or dissociative identity disorder. Second, the consensus is in the "Adding Recent Members" section. It was mostly talked about in user talk pages and edit summaries, but that section helped solidify it. And finally, the argument that he has no villainous motivations is completely false as well, because his probably most villainous moment was done at a time where his mind was at its most healed. Lest we forget, he knowingly ventured back in time to kill someone. And because of that and his screw up in completing it, he pretty much rewrote reality into a little time known as the Age of Apocalypse. And just because he's finally tried to turn himself around recently doesn't mean he'll stay that way or that he's remembered in the long run for it. Bishop has been more of a villain recently, but he's still listed among the heroes because, in the long run, that's what he's more remembered as. Same reason why Magneto and Juggernaut are still listed as villains though both more recently have been on the heroes side. All this and your admitted bias really does not add up any working argument for moving Legion.68.33.140.207 (talk) 05:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, it was by very logistically improbable (story-driven) accident, and he went back in time to kill Magneto, a mass-murdering terrorist, so good intentions, and lest we forget, he has the mentality of a child, so all he thought was that it would help his father. Wolverine has also offhandedly killed thousands of far less dangerous baddies. In addition, Legion recently wiped out a horde of demon lords preventing them from eating the souls of humanity, which is definitely a plus column, so yeah, extremely arguable, and I stand by that he's not a villain, but a plot device or supporting character. In any case, I'll remove the mentions of him being autistic at least. David A (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

If it's "extremely arguable", why did you even bring it up? And I've reverted the edit that removed the "autistic" description, because it was going against material that had been cited. In New Mutants #27, page 2, he's described as autistic and schizophrenic (as well as having multiple personalities on the next page) by Professor Xavier. Not to mention that in this issue he has just wiped out the consciousnesses of at least three people, one of them being his mother. The X-Men are there because he's messing up the brains of innocent people, so he's definitely the antagonist in that story. Feeling bad for him doesn't change the character, David. It only means you're obsessing over this maybe a bit too much. Friginator (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, I brought it up because it is arguable due to that he is not malevolent, absorbing minds was due to trauma and lack of control or awareness, which is stated in the handbook, and for most of his career, including all that time he spent on Muir Isle, he seems to mostly be used as a plot device. Hence, I feel he should be put in an ambiguous "supporting character" section along with quite a few others.

But you are right in that I may take it too personally. In Age Of X, he (and suicide-bomber Hulk) were deliberately used as allegories for myself (despite that I don't have mpd, and never hurt anybody outside of last resort self-defence), and when he's compared to Magneto, I sort of read it as: "Being walled off is morally equivalent to Usama Bin Laden? Really?! What kind of messed up logic or disproportionate moral system is that?" Much less Apocalypse, who is worse than Hitler and Stalin combined. But again, I may take him too much like an attack on autistic in general. I mean, Madison Jeffries is much more like autistic actually are than Legion is. David A (talk) 07:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

You honestly thought the character was written based on you? That's what this is about? Because you thought Age of X was written as an attack on you? David, don't let your belief that you're somehow being written into comic books as an attack on you affect the organization of articles and templates. Just because a fictional character shares your name does not make them an attack on you. (Just out of curiosity, was this movie about you too?) Your narcissistic agenda should not get in the way of people trying to edit this encyclopedia in a constructive, unbiased way. Friginator (talk) 17:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Look, could you please try to stop with the poison, diversions, misunderstandings, and possibly even hatred, as it is necessary to get anywhere. I obviously don't think that the 11 years old movie has anything to do with me, and I don't have a "narcissistic agenda". What I have is an automatic extreme overattention for details and structures, which I have been told is typical for my condition and forces me to see patterns in everything.

In this particular case, after I made a few apparently controversial TV Tropes edits a few years ago (to process some old damage or trivia, long story), I noticed that there were some very extreme reactions directly copying structures based on that, me, and my story, sometimes quote-by-quote, word-by-word, characterisation-by-characterisation, scene-by-scene, with names and anagrams of names of myself and in this case this seemed to be about the author thinking that my difference in perspective had "rewritten" the structure of the Marvelverse (which I find an odd take).

I could technically lay it all out for you, but for one thing it would take ages, and for the other you have made it clear in an offensive fashion that you aren't interested in hearing my side of the story. Hence, let's stick to that you could make a case for that it is simply about my condition forcing me to see patterns that arent there, but I also cannot lie, and have found this entire experience extremely painful, confusing, and intrusive, so it is definitely not even remotely about a diva trip, quite the opposite. It is about feeling ridiculously hounded for unclear and seemingly very disproportionate reasons.

Anyway, somewhat returning to the topic, for one thing I am not preventing anybody from making constructive edits, nor making disruptive ones. This is just a talk page. And for the second, if you want the main reasons for me finding the listing out of place then please check the first column of my previous post, and focus on that instead, as I'm always honest. I'm convenient for others like that, although not for myself. I also didn't intend for this to become some sort of big deal, just to focus on the character itself. And then you say things like "It just keeps coming" as if I don't have the right to defend myself, but all right I have a problem with being brief and apologise for that. David A (talk) 08:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Archive 1