Talk:Beyonder

message: Is the Beyonder still merged to the Molecule Man?
* I'm wondering what, if any, the Beyonder's retconned "he's just a Mutant Inhuman" status will bear on Molecule Man's origin.  --Dr Archeville 12:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Beyonder and Molecule Man

message: I removed the reference to the end of Secret Wars II creating the New Universe.  Officially, my reason is that there was no reference for the statement, although I can unofficially add that I was an avid NU fan, and I remember vehement denials in the letters columns of NU books that this was the origin of the NU.  (Of course, they also vehemently said that there would never be a NU/616 crossover, but, hey.... ) CatherS 02:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Universe 

message: The image :Image:SecretwarsII3.png 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. --06:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:SecretwarsII3.png

message: As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T  14:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: C-Class rated for Comics Project

message: *The Beyonder then fights the Puma, believing that the only purpose left in his life is to help the Puma find his by allowing Puma to become one with the universe and slay him- having been convinced of the Beyonder's nature as a malicious threat-, but a casual comment by Spider-Man about the Beyonder's manipulations causes Puma to lose faith in himself at the crucial moment, and the Beyonder survives unscratched. [9]
:To help the Puma find his.. what?  His purpose?  His purpose was to merge with the universe and get killed?  Or his purpose is to be slain by the Puma after helping him become one with the universe, so he was strong enough to do so?  Someone who read this please clarify the meaning.  Dream Focus 21:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence is referring to Xavier, the strongest telepath there is.  He sensed who he was, and then it says it was deduced by him also, as though he was a second person.  Was there someone other than Xavier who sensed this, perhaps Mr. Fantastic using some sort of device?  Dream Focus 21:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The wording is confusing, please clarify 

message: * The Spider Ham reference to the Beyonder was listed under the multiple universes. Whether or not the Spider Ham universe is actually claimed as a cannon alternate Marvel universe is irrelevant (and probably not true) since it is most certainly a parody comic. Arrow of Thyme (talk) 22:30, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved Spider Ham portion 

message: Below information was tagged for needing sources since 2008. Please feel free to re-add to the article with appropriate citations. Doniago (talk) 15:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced Material 

message: :The Beyonder (comics) →  – This article should be moved back to its original title, per the arguments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Beyonder, good move? 68.57.233.34 (talk) 20:45, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Except for the fact that he isnt.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8084:A200:580:95CB:73B0:BB59:6CC (talk) 13:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Who cares?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 08:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

text: Do you have a reliable source that explicitly states your claim that this fictional character is omnipotent or is it just your personal interpretation of the work of fiction?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 11:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Marvel Comics/Jim Shooter have stated the claims and your earlier comment makes me assumed you aren't really able to debate with me but that just my assumption. Beyonder (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been repeated claims of the Beyonder being omnipotent in the comics, but there have also been other (referenced within the article) instances when he has shown limitations, or been stated to be nearly omnipotent (in the Avengers issue right after the Second Secret Wars), and Marvel Comics has a history of calling lots of characters omnipotent, including Odin, who is outclassed by many other entities. The inconsistency of the Beyonder character is the problem here, so to me it seemed sensible to list him as almost but not quite omnipotent based on the sum total picture. David A (talk) 12:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If he is described as omnipotent in reliable sources then use those reliable sources to discuss it. Otherwise it is a violation of WP:OR to post one's own personal interpretation of a story.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 12:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We have already done so, over, and over, and over. (I still have the mental scars...) And he sticks with interpeting it literally, and I stick with that I respect and used to like the character, but that there were matter-of-fact contradictions. I would prefer if you or some other neutral party made a decision to put a stop to this. Thank you. David A (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So if it's already said we don't need to keep talking about it. BeyonderGod, if you have explicit proof of anything to the contrary provide it here and now or do not suggest a different set of information.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 12:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

text: No.
# There's no "winning" or "losing", there's consensus. 
# Also, those are primary sources. You'd need a secondary source saying that he limits himself.
# Those sources could have been drawn by you. We need a link to an issue where they came from.
# This one mentions nothing about power limiting, nor does this.
Origamiteⓣⓒ 15:28, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

text: Are you claiming he is absolutely omnipotent, essentially omnipotent or accidentally omnipotent (See Omnipotence paradox)? It sounds like he may be accidentally omnipotent which means he is limited in his omnipotence. VMS Mosaic (talk) 09:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beyonder Is Omnipotent 

message: Could you please provide a scan where it is stated that the Marvel multiverse was a drop in the ocean compared to the Beyond realm. The way I remember it, it was stated that a universe was a comparative drop in the ocean. But I will recheck later.  David A (talk) 12:57, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not disputing that the Beyond realm is equal to a large multiverse. I agree with this. I just remember that the information blurb said that a universe was a drop in the ocean compared to it, not a multiverse. David A (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, here it is. I googled and found the image. One of your old uploads, I believe. It is clearly stated that a universe was as a droplet in the ocean compared to the Beyond Realm. David A (talk) 14:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

text: I would like an explicit source that says that the Marvel multiverse was as a drop of water in the ocean compared to the Beyond realm, because currently it links to Secret Wars II issue #4, which clearly states that it was a universe that was a drop in the ocean. David A (talk) 05:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Universe or Multiverse?

message: , is English your first language? You seem to have problems with the formatting, which is one of the reasons I'm reverting you. In your recent edits, you've changed the tense of the beginning of the section from the imperfect to preterite, contrary to the rest of the examples. A comma and a space are both needed to differentiate list items, unlike  and the subject-verb agreement is also iffy. You've also messed up the Cosmic Cube category formatting at the bottom of the article. "Its" is used to refer to the properties of an object, whereas "it's" means "it is". "Multiversal scale" is correct, as "multiversal" is an adjective regarding the noun "scale" while "multiverse" is a noun, which can't be used as such. The section you've been editing is extremely disproportionate to the rest of the sections.  is an extremely run-on sentence.  is somewhat redundant. Anything you want to add, ? Origamiteⓣⓒ 19:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. I am just tired of repeatedly having to deal with Sean (BG's real name) about the same things here and elsewhere for 8 months running. I thought that the previous version was fine and that the current version is severely disorganised. He has even uploaded disgusting homophobic slur insults about my other handle "Antvasima" on "DefiniThing" and "Urban Dictionary" and created a 10 page attack thread about me on the "MovieCodec" forum. In addition, he has technically reverted 4 times today. David A (talk) 19:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

text: I have tried to work with you on several previous occasions, but everything you added this time came out completely jumbled, including your attempt to change what higher-dimensional space means per definition. If Marvel uses the higher-dimensional space terminology, then the rules for how that works apply, in much the same manner as the dimensions of height, width, length, and time, and if it explicitly stated in the handbook that the Living Tribunal of the 1980s was only able to detonate stars, then that is also relevant to keep as valid information. In addition, you specifically removed the supervillain categories, even though the Beyonder planned to commit multiversal genocide and gleefully laughed about it. David A (talk) 20:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

text: There is a difference between unfortunate accidents and deliberate plans of genocide. Also, I don't personally care about whether one fictional character from one franchise is higher than another or not. I just like to index and categorize things. What I do care about is that if a certain concept is used, here higher-dimensional space, which is definitely not the same as the wrong usage of the word "dimension" as meaning "pocket universe", it should be accurately described. That is all. David A (talk) 20:31, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

text: Marvel used 16-dimensional/higher-dimensional space to define the Living Tribunal in "Fantastic Four Annual 27". "Unstable Molecules" I think the story was called. You should know this by now, as you just attempted to summarise it. Regardless, how higher-dimensional space works in relation to lower-dimensional space is defined in Projective geometry. David A (talk) 20:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

text: 16-dimensional means height, length, width, and 13 dimensions more. That is how the concept of higher-dimensional space fundamentally works. There is no point to using the term at all if the writers do not understand this fact. In addition, during the JLA story "Crisis Times Five" by Grant Morrison, the 5 dimensional imp Qwsp was defined as having length, height, width, as well as encompassing planar time, making 5 dimensions in total, and to be two degrees of infinity above Earth's superheroes by the android Hourman. They are where they are supposed to be. David A (talk) 03:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Again? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Beyonder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100830031726/http://www.popcultureshock.com:80/new-avengers-illuminati-3/41826/ to http://www.popcultureshock.com/new-avengers-illuminati-3/41826/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 88.109.107.47 and  the question of Beyonder's omnipotence should be discussed here, not spread across edit summaries on the article.  As far as I can tell, the question of Beyonder's omnipotence has not been conclusively brought to consensus in previous conversations on this talk page.  As the issue seems to be contentious, you are both violating the three-revert rule by continuing to revert each other.—Laoris (talk) 04:50, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not going to interfere, but just want to inform you that Jim Starlin is the artist who drew the Living Tribunal's handbook profile image, not the one who wrote that text. The Marvel handbooks are written by their interns, and the statistics written by Tom Brevoort. David A (talk) 11:30, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beyonder omnipotence 

message: The Bendis retcon that he was actually just a mutant inhuman was de-retconned by Hickman (or at some point earlier?), no? This could be clarified? john k (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mutant/Inhuman retcon