Talk:The New Avengers (comics)

message: Shouldn't this be at New Avengers (comics), as per the norm? rst20xx 16:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a viable change to me although I have no idea how much of a project that would be, but nobody has objected so I say feel free. MrDenton 16:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Avengers (comics)? 

message: Tony Stark was not named Maria Hill's replacement. She noted he should have been picked.
The Humanoid Typhoon 14:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake 

message: Spider Man and Cage are Co-Leaders? Where was this info found. I only read that cage was leader.Phoenix741 20:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was confirmed that he is the leader, bendis said it himself.Phoenix741 17:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's awesome, but since it hasn't been addressed in the actual comic, shouldn't we list the source where the information comes from? Also, Spider-man is still (or again) listed as "co-leader", I'm removing it until that can be verified. MrDenton 17:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on the same page where it was said that Iron Fist and Cage were going to be on the avengers, and spider-man is not co-leader so if it is the same guy who put it back up, we need to talk to him.Phoenix741 01:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Co-Leaders 

message: There's a sentence under New Avengers: Disassembled about Jessica Drew locating Captain America that is in past tense. I'm just going to go ahead and change this because I can't imagine anyone would object. Universaladdress 21:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tense Edits

message: This spell, cast by Strange in #31 would allow the New Avengers to know if anyone there there was hiding something. Despite the fact that Cage's baby was a Skrull, and Spider-Woman is probably one too, the spell had no effect on any of them. Strange himself said that if anyone WAS hiding something, they'd have a seizure. What do you think happened?
:Honestly I think he is a Skrull, but this kinda stuff does not belong here. Marvel.com boards are a good place to talk about it.Phoenix741 11:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The spell of Tartashi 

message: In the "Treason?" section of the article, it says that at the end of the most recent issue, Jessica Drew's eyes glow green like a Skrull's, and she walks off with Skrull Electra's body.  I checked a couple times, and it didn't look that way to me.  The way I interpreted it was that she was going to take the body to Stark despite what the other's said, and Wolverine tried to stop her.  She checked HIS eyes to make sure he wasn't a Skrull.  She even said sorry.  If she had been a Skrull, why would she apologize for hurting him?  It says that her eyes glowed in the article for Jessica Drew as well.  Am I the only one who didn't see her eyes glow?DNMN 08:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they glowed, I think people are just jumping the gun, like everyone with green eyes is going to be a skrull.Phoenix741 23:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  They weren't glowing. Spider-Woman HAS green eyes. I interpreted it the same way as well, Jessica deciding to take the body to Stark regardless. The Great Unwashed 02:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's kinda what I thought.  Should we take it out, or has someone done so already (I haven't checked yet)?  And should we also take the initiative (aha...ahahahaha) to do that on the Jessica Drew page?DNMN 08:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take it out, I think. It's not super-obvious like Elektra or Cage's kid. It's basically fan-speculation and saying she's a Skrull because she has green eyes isn't exactly empirical when she has them already. I have green eyes, and the doctor says I'm not a Skrull.The Great Unwashed 13:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spider-Woman

message: :Image:New avengers sketch.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 02:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well at least they are putting it in Articles. I took it look at it and there is a fair use.Phoenix741(Talk Page) 21:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:New avengers sketch.jpg

message: Given the length of the plot summary, might it be an idea to start a new article: List of New Avengers (comics) story arcs (in a similar manner to List of Ultimate Spider-Man story arcs, for example).  Were this done I'd recommend seperating the information about variant covers into a new section in the main article solely for information on variant covers (although some might argue that the information on variant covers isn't particularly relevant anyway...) Planewalker Dave (talk) 12:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I think that the plot summary simply needs to be condensed here to include only important information. The bare minimum. Rau's talk 21:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably a good idea.  In particular, The Trust and The New New Avengers could use a hack down.  Planewalker Dave (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait, I remember getting those down to two paragraphs each. Geez I need to pay more attention. But at least that proves it can be done. Rau's talk 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Okay, this is done. The new article is New Avengers (Story Arcs) and the Storylines section in the current article now just links there. The plot clean-up notice has been removed as it is no longer applicable to this article.Hermiod (talk) 07:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Story Arcs split

message: This isn't the only article affected, but people are jumping the gun with Brian Michael Bendis' comment that Electro's actions in New Avengers #1 are connected to Secret Invasion. Too much speculation about who is and is not a Skrull is sneaking in to various articles connected to Secret Invasion, none of which is based on published comic books. Hermiod (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electro 

message: New Avengers redirects here - wouldn't it just make sense to have this at that page or is there some cunning plan? We could turn that page into a disambiguation page for example, but as it stands it doesn't make much sense. It has been a redirect for 2 years not apart from the break out of a disambiguation page at one point so it'd be worth resolving one way or the other. As I doubt either New Avengers is so overwhelmingly more notable than the other a disambiguation page might be the way to go but I am not bothered either way as long as we do something. (Emperor (talk) 23:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This series' proper title is also "The New Avengers". "New Avengers" should redirect to "The New Avengers" and that should be a disambiguation page. "New Avengers (comics)" should redirect to "The New Avengers (comics)" and Then there should be a page for the tv show as well. Does that make sense? Rau's Speak Page 23:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Took me a couple of reads but yes it does. Move this to "The New Avengers (comics)" and make The New Avengers the disambiguation. The problem is the links to external sites here show other people use "New Avengers" as does Marvel . So I suppose it depends on what the consensus think - it does say "The New Avengers" on the covers so... (Emperor (talk) 03:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Marvel and everyone refers to them as The Ultimates. But the comic uses Ultimates, that's the name of the article. I think there is actually a guideline on this. I think they call it "Naming Conventions", but I've never seen it. A more experienced user could tell you. Rau's Speak Page 04:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Upon review, the series is called The Ultimates, so yea. That part of what I said is untrue. Rau's Speak Page 08:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[New Avengers]] 

message: The same thing is happening over at Mighty Avengers (a page which I'm not even sure why it's back without discussion).  Please, don't update the rosters until the new issues featuring those rosters are released.  Yes, we know it's going to happen but it hasn't happen yet.  Planewalker Dave (talk) 12:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated roster 

message: I recently came across an issue of this series, apparently a Department of Defense giveaway. Are these stories in continuity or exist in a separate one? RahadyanS (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''New Avengers: America Salutes You'' 

message: I have entered ISBN information for New Avengers 9, but am uncertain as to how to move to correct place. Please correct  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.69.209.49 (talk) 21:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISBN 

message: When the article is about a comic-book series, as opposed to a character, we need to show an example of the series, with its logo, cover treatment, trade dress, etc. -- Tenebrae (talk) 14:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SHB image needs replaced

message: The writers and artists are listed in the group publication information, and then again in a separate section that lists the creative team, including the editors. Is it really necessary to have the creators of The New Avengers listed twice, and have a cover image for both #1's of the series? I tried to consolidate the redundant information, but it was reverted. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as the creators are concerned my guess would be no but that is question for infobox's talk page as to why it is included twice. I do know the first image is to used to represent the team (could be any image but covers are considered less infringing on the copyright), the second image is to represent the publication (this is typically the cover to first issue).--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/20100920__New_Avengers__has_same_characters_back_with_a_vengeance.html -Sharp962 (talk) 02:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice feature by Philadelphia Inquirer 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The New Avengers (comics). 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/20070202054417/http://www.newsarama.com:80/marvelnew/newavengers/meet_the_new.html to http://www.newsarama.com/marvelnew/newavengers/meet_the_new.html
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 08:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified