FANDOM

The Many-Angled One

Admin Content Moderator
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • How do we know it's Michael Malone as "Venom" in Eddie's nightmare of his past misadventures with symbiotes at the beginning of Venom Vol. 1 #150? Given that Eddie had never met Malone, he shouldn't have any memories of him. In fact, the only host of that symbiote who he had met at that point was Patricia Robertson, which should make her a more likely candidate.

      Loading editor
    • There's a similar question I've been mulling over regarding Venomverse #2: it doesn't make sense (at least not to me) that Earth-616 Venom would have been referring to the Venomverse incarnation of Carnage prior to having met him, since the only incarnation of Carnage he knew prior to Issue 3 was the Earth-616 version.

        Loading editor
    • Arawn 999 wrote: There's a similar question I've been mulling over regarding Venomverse #2: it doesn't make sense (at least not to me) that Earth-616 Venom would have been referring to the Venomverse incarnation of Carnage prior to having met him, since the only incarnation of Carnage he knew prior to Issue 3 was the Earth-616 version.

      He's referring to any they can get, not a specific one he does or doesn't know; meanwhile, the one they find is the one that's linked, which is more helpful to the reader than just a generic link.

        Loading editor
    • AnnabellRice wrote:

      Arawn 999 wrote: There's a similar question I've been mulling over regarding Venomverse #2: it doesn't make sense (at least not to me) that Earth-616 Venom would have been referring to the Venomverse incarnation of Carnage prior to having met him, since the only incarnation of Carnage he knew prior to Issue 3 was the Earth-616 version.

      He's referring to any they can get, not a specific one he does or doesn't know; meanwhile, the one they find is the one that's linked, which is more helpful to the reader than just a generic link.

      Alright, fair enough.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
    • View all 9 replies
    • Didn't know there was a rule that explicitly stated every writing system had to follow the New York Times style guide nor the Unicode (you should warn the other sites about that, really). And I don't know who these admins you claim encouraged you are neither, but there's nothing wrong with using hyphens instead of en dashes.

      Anyway, I locked the pages for twelve hours; sufficient time for me to think what I should do next about this. And I'm tired of this, really. You won't stop. I won't stop. Things will consequently get out of control. Do whatever you want. Making our wiki "punctuation-correct" won't make the whole world replace their "misused" hyphens with en dashes and use them "correctly" anyway.

      Bye!

        Loading editor
    • The Many-Angled One wrote: Didn't know there was a rule that explicitly stated every writing system had to follow the New York Times style guide nor the Unicode (you should warn the other sites about that, really). And I don't know who these admins you claim encouraged you are neither, but there's nothing wrong with using hyphens instead of en dashes.

      Anyway, I locked the pages for twelve hours; sufficient time for me to think what I should do next about this. And I'm tired of this, really. You won't stop. I won't stop. Things will consequently get out of control. Do whatever you want. Making our wiki "punctuation-correct" won't make the whole world replace their "misused" hyphens with en dashes and use them "correctly" anyway.

      And that's the goal anyway: changing the way the entire world functions with a wiki about comic books. It's sad to think that we've already failed so spectacularly.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Wouldn't that also make "Terrorist Organizations" redundant, as it's a type of criminal organization? Likewise the sub-category in the "criminal organizations" for "Crime Families"? Wouldn't it be easier for those searching, having the option of additional sub-categories in the "Criminal Organizations" section? As in terrorists, organized crime, mercenary, assassin, and cults right off the top of my head.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • hello, a strong greeting, I hope not to disturb, but as a big fan of the lists of mutants alive after M day and seeing that you are the administrator that is always pending, I would like to ask,

    1. What is the reason for the Fenris twins can not be on the list, it is clear that they are mutants have the genetic material and would be within the category. 2. Please could you separate Shadow King (Earth-616) from Amahl Farouk (Earth-616), are different entities and Shadow King was killed in the astral plane and Amahl is still alive so at this moment they are not the same. 3 taking into account that the following mutants were taken into account for the initiative by Tony Stark, it would be understood that they retained their powers? - Neurotap - Otomo (Earth-616) - Topspin - Hiro Sokuto (Earth-616). 4. Why was the new mutant Toma Zaslon (Earth-616) removed from the list? 5. Would it be possible to put the categories Mutants born or conceived after M-Day, Mutants activated after M-Day, in a single category of mutants post m day and thus save space?

    Thanking the attention as a fan I'm waiting for an answer. I reiterate I hope not to disturb.


    hola, un saludo fuerte, espero no molestar, pero como gran fan de las listas de mutantes vivos despues de M day y viendo que eres el administrador que siempre esta pendiente, quisiera preguntar,

    1. cual es la razon para que los gemelos Fenris no puedan estar en la lista, es claro que son mutantes tienen el material genetico y estarian dentro de la categoria. 2. por favor podrias separar a Shadow King (Earth-616) de Amahl Farouk (Earth-616), son diferentes entes y Shadow King fue asesinado en el plano astral y Amahl sigue vivo por lo cual en este momento no son los mismos. 3 teniendo en cuenta que los siguientes mutantes fuero tenidos en cuenta para la iniciativa por Tony Stark, se entenderia que retuvieron sus poderes? - Neurotap - Otomo (Earth-616) - Topspin - Hiro Sokuto (Earth-616). 4. porque la nueva mutante Toma Zaslon (Earth-616), fue retirada de la lista? 5. seria posible poner las categorias Mutants born or conceived after M-Day , Mutants activated after M-Day, en una sola categoria de mutantes post m day y asi ahorrar espacio?

    agradeciendo la atencion como fan espero una respuesta. reitero espero no molestar.

      Loading editor
    • View all 6 replies
    • Jcardo wrote: Gracias por las respuesta. un saludo fuerteeeeee


      Thanks for the answers. a strong greeting

      la propuesta del punto 4, seria pasar el listado de Hope summer y the ligths y hacer un solo grupo de mutantes nuevos y activos despues de M Day, sin importar si se activaron después de AVX.


      the proposal of point 4, would be to pass the list of Hope summer and the ligths and make a single group of new and active mutants after M Day, regardless of whether they were activated after AVX.

      I'll pass it on to the other admins/mods.


      Lo pasaré a los otros administradores / mods.

      Jcardo wrote: no entendi el problema con los nuevos?, si para eso existe esta categoria Mutants discovered/revealed after M-Day Mutants who were activated before and were still active after M-Day, but were unknown before that event. no es necesario tener la fecha especifica de activacion, creo que esa era la finalidad de ese capitulo, y para eso lo hizo el creador de la lista.

      --------------------------------------------------------
      

      I did not understand the problem with the new ones, if for that there is this category Mutants discovered / revealed after M-Day Mutants who were activated before and were still active after M-Day, but were unknown before that event. it is not necessary to have the specific activation date, I think that was the purpose of that chapter, and for that the creator of the list did it.

      Per what's written in that section, only mutants whose powers were activated before M-Day and who remained active after it should be there. Since the time of activation of many of those mutants you added is unknown, they don't really fit there.


      Según lo que está escrito en esa sección, solo los mutantes cuyos poderes fueron activados antes del Día M y que permanecieron activos después de que debería estar allí. Dado que el momento de la activación de muchos de esos mutantes que agregó es desconocido, en realidad no encajan allí.

        Loading editor
    • Esta bien un saludo. ________________ Okay, thanks for the time to respond, you are very kind

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi The Many-Angled One. How are you doing?

      Loading editor
  • I noticed you corrected many of my corrections in the first appearance field... Apart from specific minor corrections... Do you want me to change something in general about what I am doing? So that you don't have to correct it... Some rule or guide I am missing?

      Loading editor
    • View all 16 replies
    • To make my point clear, the field is used for appearances and mentions are not that; that's not a thing we need a rule to tell us.

      I'm not against crediting the writer who introduced a character through a mention, nor am I against listing their "first mention" on the "First2" field (with a note on the "Notes" section complementing the information, preferably).

        Loading editor
    • The Many-Angled One wrote: To make my point clear, the field is used for appearances and mentions are not that; that's not a thing we need a rule to tell us.

      I'm not against crediting the writer who introduced a character through a mention, nor am I against listing their "first mention" on the "First2" field (with a note on the "Notes" section complementing the information, preferably).

      That was one side on my interpretation of it, but the other way seemed fine to me as well. The handbook field (I'm using Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Update #1 and #2 here) I was mentioned is named "first appearance", yet does include mentions, in first rank (simarly for Legion and X-Force (M Branch)). Similarly, it list sthe identities for Excalibur ("Hussain", then "Excalibur"), the degree of appearance for Hecatomb ("energies", "identified", "full"), Midgard Serpent ("behind the scenes", "full"), Scalphunter ("shadowed", "identified, full") or Wraith ("vision", "physical", "identified").

      Recent handbooks presents the mention as part of the first appearance(s) as well: Shiklah in Secret Wars: Official Guide to the Marvel Multiverse #1, Apocalypse Twins, Avengers Initiative (1950s) and Silver Sable in Avengers NOW! #1.

      Given this, the term "appearance" isn't seemingly meant to separate "mention" from "appearance" as we used it on the comics page, but simply to indicate the first appearance of a subject in comics.

      PS: The notes section could indeed serves that purpose, but the infobox (inspired by the handbooks) does it as good, if not better and with more clarity/quicker access to the information.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I didn't know that military assault vehicles aren't counted on appearance lists, but if that's the case then shouldn't the MD AH-6 Little Bird be removed from Venom Vol. 3 #5 and #6?

      Loading editor
    • I meant "real life vehicles" with "those type of vehicles." Anyway, they are listed, but only when specified. So, there's no problem in them being listed in those pages you mentioned as they were specified there.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Why are you switching the image of the storylines to the text ones? It's lots more story-focused and visually cleaner to put the textless ones.

      Loading editor
    • Well, I put them back. When you have time, please explain me why you did that, because I KNOW textless is better.

        Loading editor
    • I was only replacing them with the standard covers because most of the story arcs / storylines pages I've seen being created here (most of them for recent stories, but some for classic ones too) had them instead of the textless ones. If you think the textless ones are better, then go for it.

        Loading editor
    • Generally I suspect it's because of consistency. There aren't textless versions available for older storyline articles, so to keep things uniform, it's best to use the standard covers since that's an option which can be implemented on them all.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I get tired because i have always to talk about that, but you are been abusive just because you belong to the adm. staff and are removing my edits without any reason, even when it is referenced. Why are you doing that?

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • Just read anything related to the Multiverse that was released after that issue, and you will see that what constitutes it was basically changed. For example, all those realms are part of a single universe which in conjuction with others form a Multiverse. You weren't giving sufficient detail, you were giving excessive detail and that's overexplaining.

        Loading editor
    • You are wrong, but I definitely stop here because you wont change your mind.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello.. Why did you canceled my modification on death of X and IVX ? I Just finished reading death of X and it clearly indicates that it is followed by IVX.

      Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message