Talk:Alternative versions of Wolverine

message: This article should be merged with the original Wolverine article. Even though there are many alternate version of Wolverine, we don't have articles to list alternate Captain Americas or Spidermen.--Gonzalo84 23:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'd argue the precedent is in Alternate versions of Spider-Man, Alternate versions of Superman, Alternate versions of Batman, Alternate versions of Wonder Woman etc. Their articles are all very large and they're all the company's flagship characters.~ZytheTalk to me! 16:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this discussion is old, but Gonzalo84, the Wolverine article is already too long.  Merging the many alternate versions of Wolverine into it would make it even longer.  Remember, Wikipedia is not paper, there is no deadline, and Wolverine is a very notable character inside comics and outside of it, being one of two mutants to get their own spinoff solo movie.  Notthegoatseguy 21:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: I think there's missing another Wolverine from a parallel universe, one in which he isn't captured by the weapon X project guys and ends up gettin' some answers with the ones in charge, never getting adamantium inserted in is body in this parallel universe, the only problem is that I can't the recall where I saw it. Apontas 6:47 am, 14 May 2007 (GMT)
: Sounds like an issue of What If? where Wolverine fights Weapon X. 60.240.41.159 (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What If? Vol. 2 Iss. 62 is the issue I was referring too. Wolverine defeated the team sent to take him in and so another test subject was chosed for the adamantium bonding process, with predictable results. If this is not the story the above was referring too, then so be it. 60.240.41.159 (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Alternate Wolverine

message: The rest of the Ultimate characters' pages have been reestablished, and thus Ultimate Wolverine should be reinstated.  Thoughts?  Mihara 18:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reinstated or not, I feel it needs to be dramtically rewritten. Lots42 08:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The general idea is that Ultimate characters who are drastically different from their 616 counterparts should get their own pages assuming they have enough history for a seperate page.  For example, Nick Fury is black, younger, and has appeared in every single core Ultimate title and many of the mini series, so he deserves his own page.  Luke Cage is also drastically different, but his appearance was a couple cameos in one Ultimates 2 arc.  If Wolverine's origin becomes very different, maybe he'll get his own page.  For now, this is fine.  Notthegoatseguy 21:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ultimate Wolverine

message: Wolverine's article is long enough as it is. Alternate Wolverine being on it's own page is cool in my opinion.
And would anyone object if I added the alternate-future Wolverine -skeleton- from Future Imperfect. After all, it actually affects the plot.
Lots42 05:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two different topics 

message: :Image:Exiles85.jpg 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 04:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Exiles85.jpg

message: :Image:Newmangaverse2.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Newmangaverse2.jpg

message: :Image:UltLogan.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:UltLogan.jpg

message: I'm of the opinion that this page should be scrapped completely and all appropriate information should be incorporated into the appropriate related articles, ie. Ultimate X-Men, Age of Apocalypse. Yes, there's a lot of info here, but a large problem this page has is that there is very little here based on real world notability. It's mainly plot summary that can be condensed. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's assuming the "alternate versions" of these characters are notable enough to write about in the first place. As I mentioned above, why not just mention the character differences in the appropriate story article ("Days of Future Past", Wolverine: the End, etc.)? You'll only need to cover the basic details anyway, unless there is extensive secondary source analysis of the iteration of the character. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would argue that any version of a main X-Men character such as Wolverine, the original X-Men team, the 1975 team, etc. would be notable enough to have a write up, no matter how short it is. Also, while you can go ahead and write up a very very very brief mention of the character differences in the appropriate story article, an encyclopedia that is meant not just for the fan but also for a lay person (so to speak) needs to have an easy way for a reader to read about all the iterations of the character, thus the alternate versions article for the main/biggest characters in the Marvel universe. Not many lay persons would go searching for a particular story line like Wolverine: The End or Days of Future Past. They will just search for Wolverine or Storm or Cyclops. When you combine this reasoning with the fact that the alternate versions articles would be too long to be placed in the main article, and you get the rationale for having a link in the main article to the alternative versions article for the lay person. If you want to provide basic details of these character in EACH of the story lines, including EACH Uncanny X-Men storyline (afterall, consistency is key in my opinion), please go ahead. But having a brief mention of these characters in the actual storyline article doesn't diminish the importance to have one article that includes all the versions for the lay person who will not search through hundreds of different storyline and tens of different universes that some characters have been involved in. And we shouldn't make them do this. --RossF18 (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "I would argue that any version of a main X-Men character such as Wolverine, the original X-Men team, the 1975 team, etc. would be notable enough to have a write up, no matter how short it is." No, they are not inherently notable. The stories the various version appear in are more notable, since there is often secondary sources like sales figures and critical commentary. And yes, general editors would search for the stories, because that's the logical place to look for, say, details about Wolverine in "Age of Apocalypse". I know Kingdom Come (comic book) gets a number of edits about the variations of the main characters that appear within.WesleyDodds (talk) 00:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you then want to move all the main pages to the Uncanny X-Men article? Moving Ultimate Wolverine (and other Ultimate characters) to the Ultimate X-Men page would require, by your reasoning, moving all of the 616 Universe character bios to the Uncanny X-Men/X-Men/New X-Men pages. You're going to be in charge of that? Please also read my entire post. I never said anything about anything being inherently notable. And as far as people who know nothing about comics searching for story arcs instead of characters, you're going to have to prove that to me since I do not take your word for it. Take a person who just saw the movie X-Men for the first time. He/she wants to know about Wolverine. Guess what she'll search for? He'll or she'll search for Wolvorine, not for Days of Future Past story line, not for Messiah story arc, not House of M story arc and not for Ultimate X-Men. So, with other chracters. Your claim that "general editors would search for the stories, because that's the logical place to look for, say, details about Wolverine in 'Age of Apocalypse'" doesn't hold up given that many general editors don't know about Age of Apocalypse or even Ultimate X-Men in the first place. If they want to know about Wolverine, why would they search for a storyline they know nothing about?--RossF18 (talk) 00:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're assuming that much of this "alternate version" material is worthy of encyclopedic inclusion in the first place. Much of it isn't. If an editor searches for Wolverine and wants details about that character in "Age of Apocalypse" or Ultimate X-Men, there will be a link to Age of Apocalypse or Ultimate X-Men in the article, if either is worth mentioning in the main article. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: An no, I'm not proposing a merges as suggested by "by your reasoning, moving all of the 616 Universe character bios to the Uncanny X-Men/X-Men/New X-Men pages". I'm saying delete most of it altogether, and incorporate what is notable (which would be very little, depending on the article). WesleyDodds (talk) 01:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Following up on your comment, Hiding, all that one really needs to know about Wolverine in Ultimate X-Men is already in that article. Add in details like the difference in appearance and that'd be pretty much it. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Extend my merge argument to deleations. If you were to deleate this article for not being "worthy of encyclopedic inclusion in the first place", then why include comic book material in the first place. Some people might argue that comics are not worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. If Alternate versions of main characters are not worthy, why no deleate the main articles also and just have a brief mention of them in Uncany X-Men, etc. articles. While I can see how some alternate universe versions of WOlverine are clearly superfluous, i.e., where he appeared in 1 or 2 issues in a 6 story arc. However, Ultimate X-Men is a significant alternate universe and main characters in that Universe should have a place in ALterante version article. I will also say that this is getting us nowhere. You say deleate, I say keep. I'll continue to say keep and you'll continue to say deleate. Unless we get more imput on this, nothing should really be deleated. --RossF18 (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ultimate X-Men is certainly notable, but Ultimate Wolverine really isn't, at least enough to warrant his own article. That's what it comes down to. The most logical choice would be to describe the character briefly in Ultimate X-Men or in a related character list article. We really don't need three paragraphs for Ultimate Wolverine, nor is there any real reason to write about the various versions of Wolverine that appear in Exiles. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's your opinion, and I have the opposite one. How are you determining notability? Number of issues a character appeared? Popularity? Do you have any third party evidence to back up your claims on the lack of notability. I don't have any evidence about presence of notability, but you saying that this character is not notable enough to have three paragraphs written is your own value judgement. If you go by issue numbers however, while main universe Wolverine has many more issues, Ultimate Wolverine has more than 100 himself in which he appeared, so if you go by appearance numbers, Ultimate Wolverine is one of the most notable characters in the Ultimate Universe. Now, I hope you're not making a claim that the Ultimate universe itself is not notable. If Ultimate universe is notable, than one of the characters that appears in at least 100 issues of that universe is also notable. Also, I have yet to see anyone in this discussion say that Ultimate Wolverine deserves his own article. We're discussing, at least I thought, deleation of the Alternate versions of Wolverine article. This is not about Ultimate Wolverine's own article, but an article about all the alternate versions of Wolverine that should be kept.--RossF18 (talk) 19:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Wesley here, but can't work out if there is some middle ground that would be acceptable to all. Hiding T  20:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

text: But even the main article for Wolverine doesn't have the history of the character on the main page, I don't think. The history of 616 Wolverine has its own page, I think. So, it wouldn't even make the summaries all in the same area. I still kind of fail to see the issue. It's standard throughout the comic book articles to have an alternate version page with all of the descriptions for a character with a large alternate histories. --RossF18 (talk) 00:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleation of Article

message: The image :Image:Weaponx1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Weaponx1.jpg

message: It might be worth including a section on the version of Wolverine from Chris Claremont's new X-Men Forever series. I'd add it myself but I haven't read any of the issues fully yet. I believe this version of Logan was killed in the first or second issue of the title. Cyclonius (talk) 09:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-Men Forever 

message: I changed the inner references to the character to 'Weapon X' rather than 'Wolverine' The name change is mentioned in the same paragraph, and in the AoA, 'Wolverine' refers to a different character.
--88.218.163.128 (talk) 20:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age of Apocalypse 

message: People keep adding, then being reverted, that in the Amalgam Universe, Wolverine was fused with Batman to form Dark Claw. This is a fact. If you want some issues, try Dark Claw #1, Legends of the Dark Claw #1, Lobo the Duck #1, JLX #1, and Marvel vs DC #4, (I believe) and the first Access Miniseries, which I think is All Access #1-4. 60.240.41.159 (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amalgam