Talk:Wolverine (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wolverine (comics) article.
WikiProject Comics This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Edit the article attached to this page or discuss it at the project talk page. Help with current tasks, or visit the notice board.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. See comments
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Archives
  • /Archive 1 - November 2003 - June 2005
  • /Archive 2 - July 2005 dispute regarding the "Powers and abilities" section
  • /Archive 3 - July 2005 - January 2006

Contents

[edit] Affiliations

You cannot put Black Cat, Spider-Man, and the Punisher under affiliations because Wolverine has teamed up with them, unless that pairing was given a name (i.e. "Heroes For Hire" for Luke Cage and Iron Fist).Solofire6 17:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "References" vs. "External links"

Hiya. Great article here; lots of good info.

The reason I've changed "External links" back to "References" comes from these verbatim sections of Wikipedia:Cite_sources. (Please note in Item 2 below that the italics are theirs, and not inserted by me. Thanks.)

1)

Complete citations in a "References" section
Complete citations, also called "references," are collected at the end of the article under a ==References== heading. Under this heading, list the comprehensive reference information as a bulleted (*) list, one bullet per reference work.

2)

External links/Further reading
The ==External links== or ==Further reading== section is placed after the references section, and offers books, articles, and links to websites related to the topic that might be of interest to the reader, but which have not been used as sources for the article. Where there is a references section, editors may prefer to call the external links section "further reading," because the references section may also contain external links, and the further reading section may contain items that are not online.

So sources used to write an article go under "References", and other helpful citations go under "External links" if they're linkable and "Further reading" if they're not online. — Tenebrae 04:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Significant issues

Not only the first appearance should be shown, but most sigificant issues and that under a separate headline, or special sidebar (alternate under the other general information in the main sidebar). Like this:

First appearance : (as Wolverine, cameo) Incredible Hulk Vol. 2 #180 (1974), (as Wolverine, fully) : Incredible Hulk Vol. 2 #181 (1974), (as Patch) Marvel Comics Presents #72 (1991), (as Death) Astonishin X-Men Vol. 2 #1 (1999)

Significant issues : joined Alpha Flight; Alpha Fligh Special Vol. 2, (1992), first joined X-Men; Giant Size X-Men #1 (1975), first Called "Logan"; X-Men Vol. 1 #103 (1977)...

This information I got from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe: X-Men 2004, but it is avalible at quite many places, as well as possible to find out one self (even if a bit hard, but many can give little...) This should accually be done with all comic characters but one has to start somewhere...

[edit] Wolverine's other Origin

I am suprise that no one have added any source of information on this origin. I thought I have added it a while back, but it may have been deleted. Anyways, in the reprinted issue of the Incredible Hulk 180, there is an extensive interview by cockrum where he goes in detail of Wolverine's origin and why it have changed. I think the high evolutionary storyline changed when they got new writers, where they didn't like the idea but I don't remember. i decided to buy the comic on ebay (my brother has the comic, but I don't know where he put it at.)--Doomzaber 22:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Healing Factor Description Inconsistancies

On the Healing Factor specific page, it is noted that Wolvie has Metahuman Regenerative powers, defined as allowing him to regrow lost limbs. However, in the description of his powers on this page, it says that he is unable to regrow his lost limbs. I know this has been gone over before, but in my read through the archives I did not see that the issue was ever really put to bed. Maybe I just missed it, I don't know. I know that the depiction of his healing abilities has changed depending on the artists, but where is it explicitly stated that he cannot regrow lost limbs? I know that it is depicted this way in the AoA timeline, but that is not Earth-616, and thus, his powers could be different there.

Given the inconsistancies in the depictions of his healing ability and strength, and how contentious an issue this is for many fans, would it be out of the question to propose a section following the description of his skills and abilities which notes the range of intensities his powers have gone through over time? It could include specific examples from the comics themselves, as well as from other Marvel source materiel. In this way, we could encompass the power variables in one section, allowing a point-counterpoint examination of evidence, while leaving the majority of the article untouched (and thus, not subject to the edit/reversion wars that this article has been subject to in the past). What does everyone else think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.89.171.253 (talk • contribs) .

I think it would be lengthy and overfocusing on minutia. I also think that the difference between "Metahuman regenerative" and "Superhuman regenerative" in the eyes of the Average Reader is... nil. - SoM 23:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I suppose you are correct, and it is already mentioned both in the description of his healing factor and strength that the intensities of those aspects of his powers has changed from writer to writer, so I guess just forget I mentioned it.

It's something that hasn't really been resolved if you think about it. According to the "Superhuman Regenerative" definition, a character is able to regenerate large amounts of tissue but not limbs or organs. It was the mention of organs that has stuck with me. The "Metahuman Regenerative" describes a character being able to regenerate large amounts of tissue and limbs or organs. The definition doesn't make any specification between which types of organs a character could and couldn't regegenerate, it simply states organs. Wolverine is a character that has regenerated completely gouged out eyes on numerous occassions. I'm not going to raise a stink over it or anything, I'm satisfied with the compromises that have been made regarding the description of the character and his healing abilities listed here on Wikipedia. However, given the facts, it would honestly appear that Wolverine's mutant healing factor potentially operates on the "Metahuman Regenerative" level. If I'm not mistaken, the Wolverine villain Cyber was listed at having a healing factor that's listed as "Superhuman Regenerative", and wasn't able to regenerate a gouged out eye he lost.

Actually, if you read the discussion section in the healing factor article you would know the answer to this. In the appendix of the marvel universe it stated that superhuman regenerative did not apply to the regeneration of VITAL organs. An eye is not a VITAL organ. Cyber was listed as Metahuman due to his adamantium skin and regenerative due to his enhanced regenerative healing factor.
The definition as related to a character who's durability is listed under "Superhuman Regenerative" states that a character isn't capable of regenerating organs. It doesn't say vital organs or any other organ, it simply says organs. That's out of the original Marvel Handbooks. Odin's Beard
I agree - it would appear that Wolvie's healing ability is in the "Metahuman Regenerative" range, especially after his adamantium was ripped out and replaced (if you will recall from the comics, removing his adamantium enhanced the effects of his mutations, including his healing abilities - I believe that this was gone over in a discussion somewhere in the archives, in a comment also mentioning the Xavier Protocols). However, as we have both stated, we're satisfied at the general description of things. Lets just let this one rest unless we can come up with a source that definitively says he can regenerate limbs or organs one way or another. I will, however, note that in the description of Deadpool, whose regenerative abilities are derived from Wolverine's, it is said that he can regenerate organs and limbs. I don't know enough about Deadpool to know whether his healing ability has been enhanced beyond Wolverine's or anything, so I guess that this is really just an issue of fanboy confusion on my part. Again, not gonna make a stink about it, just noting something that may be inconsistent, possibly just minutia. And once more, I'm pretty satisfied with things as they are. Its probably pretty obvious that my opinions regarding Wolvie are biased, but I'm trying to remain as NPOV as I can here, and the disclaimer that his abilities' strengths have varied from writer to writer pretty much sums things up.
Look at the last sentence in the first paragraph of metahuman - SoM 03:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

What about it? In the DC Universe, Metahuman is a common term to describe beings with superhuman powers. In the Marvel Universe, Metahuman is a level of durability found within the original Marvel Handbooks. DC coined the term, Marvel used the term in a different way. Odin's Beard

His recent regenerating from a scorched skeleton in Wolvie v2 #43 pretty much puts paid to this issue, at least for now. Perhaps it would be a good idea to remove this section of talk for the time being? -Toptomcat 14:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Back when he was adamantium-less, he got run over by a drunk in a car. That guy that beat his family. Wolverine was basically gonna die within seconds, but his healing factor saved him and he showed no visible signs of any incorrectly set bones. Now, getting crushed underneath the wheel of a barreling car that's gunning for you, and being told that he's about to go to Wolverine heaven, says that at least the bones of his upper body are crushed and crushed in multiple places probably. So, either his body has a memory for both acquired and genetic traits (also explaining he's growing back a full head of hair during his Weapon X time and at another, he can cut it all off to go undercover in a gang or something and not have it grow back instantly) or the broken off pieces are replaced with new cell growth and the rest just gets absorbed by the body during cell cannibalism and the new cells are altered to have the acquired traits.

You could look at Wolverine at the most basic level: just a big old mass of energy, which mutant powers often work at. All healing and cell multiplication operate on the idea of energy doing work. Cells altered to have acquired traits could come from not just the larger level interaction of DNA workings, but could also include coming from some kind of change to the energy that makes Wolverine...Wolverine. It could even be partially psychic, if you wanna go that route, though I've never heard of anything canon about "psychic" ability being involved. Maybe some kind of conscious/unconscious control that's reflexive. It could explain how he grows back a full head of hair one time and not during another time.

Baseline human healing is controlled by the subconscious mind, so there might be some kind of link there. That would mean that with decreasing the apparent gap between his conscious and unconscious minds (taking more conscious control of unconscious/reflexive body workings), he's got the potential to regrow limbs by consciously willing it to happen. Deapool had this ability to mentally regrow a body part at one time (don't know how it is now). We know he had a template from Wolverine, but it could have been altered, since he doesn't have enhanced senses (sight, hearing, etc.) and I have seen a few columns that talk about Wolverine's senses being heightened because of his healing factor (which I presume is from lesser quality cell parts being replaced with higher quality ones, making the cell's signal processing more sensitive to what he picks up and not necessarily because of increased chemical concentrations in his body). So, I'd say that there might be some mental workings with the healing factor. It's just mostly unconscious and his view of his healing factor would just reinforce how it already works, strengthening just how his healing is supposed to be.

It can account for the varying things we've seen in the past. In earlier times, he knows that he will heal faster than a regular human and later, because of certain circumstances, the idea that it works stronger/faster/etc. becomes more the norm because he believes it can/wants it to be and it's so strong that it overrides the norm of his subconscious mind, just as you would with programming the subconscious to act certain ways reflexively for learning how to fight. The subconscious mind can't tell the difference between what's real and what isn't. Enhancing the healing factor can have a secondary effect of increaasing his durability, stamina, agaility, strength, etc.

We know he's had martial arts training and many martial art styles involve self-control and listening better to the signals the body is picking up on. -- rileyV 7:30, 9 October, 2006

[edit] Powers and Abilities question

I skimmed over that section just now and I think there is some information that appears in there that certainly sounds more like someone's opinion instead of what's canon. I'm specifically referring to the statement of Wolverine's sense of smell being slightly more developed than Daredevil's. I may be wrong, but I have never read that in any profile or character biography on Wolverine printed by Marvel Comics at anytime. Now, I have heard something along the lines that his sense of hearing is slightly less developed than Daredevil's, but I'm not certain if that statement is accepted as canonical either or if it's merely someone's opinion. Unless there's information to show that the statement is canon, I believe it should be removed from the article. (Odin's Beard)

Remove it. - SoM 03:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
During one of Marvel's Big Damn Crossover Events, a fake Reed Richards tried to talk a gathering of heroes into helping him out. Wolverine smelled him for a fake, DD didn't, and DD's thought balloon (for this was in the days where all major exposition took place in thought balloons) reflected that Wolverine's sense of smell must be even better than his own.

[edit] Other Media section factually inaccurate-

I think that this: "Wolverine, as the most prominent member of the X-Men, has been the only X-Man to have been included in every adaptation of the X-Men franchise into non-comics media (including film, television, computer and video games) and is the only X-Man to have starred in his own video game." needs to be fixed. Wolverine has *not* appeared in every adaptation of the X-Men franchise. Wolverine did not appear in 1960s Marvel Super Heroes tv series, which featured the original X-men cast, nor did he appear in the Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends episode "The X-Men Adventure". I'll have to look, but I'm fairly certain that Cyclops has appeared in every or nearly every adaptation of the X-Men franchise that Wolverine has, even making cameo appearences in the Wolverine video-games. Finally, Wolverine did not appear in the television show "Generation X" which is a part of the X-Men franchise.

[edit] "(disputed! read below)"

"Dispute Update: Wolverine is not actually a mutant a previously thought, but instead what human beings would have become had the Celestials not tampered with early mankind (see Paradise X #4),such is Sabertooth, and other characters like Wendigo. So the powers which were deemed "mutant powers" are in actuality the natural abilities that all humans would possess if it weren't for the weakening of the human race by the Celestials." - GIPU 71.32.81.229 09:28, 15 April

Paradise X was simply another alternate reality and isn't part of the mainstream Marvel Universe. The aspect involving Wolverine not actually being a mutant isn't accepted as canon. Odin's Beard
Correct - none of the Earth/Universe/Paradise X stuff has any bearing on MU continuity - SoM 00:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Yo. Ace here. Seems there's gonna be a bit of a problem tomorrow with regard to mutant powers. Just thought I'd add this now. Ace Class Shadow 09:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Costume gallery

Is it really neccessary to have a costume gallery for the character? I say it should be deleted. Besides the article is getting a little to big. --Gonzalo84 22:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't really see any problem with a costume gallery. It just notes the different looks he's had over the years. Besides, the article isn't nearly as big as the Spider-Man or Hulk articles. It seems that a new section for them pop up almost daily. Odin's Beard

  • Given the number of drastic costume changes Wolverine's had over the years, I think it's a good idea to include it. Willbyr 19:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BUB

Logan always says bub,is it a canadian or american word?

It's a relatively common (even borderline stereotype) Canadian word. 24.177.49.54 21:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NUKE

The man that the government is sending in to stop Wolverine is called Nuke, for anybody that doesn't know. Nuke is a pretty obscure character and was an opponent for Dardevil and Captain America. I'd say that his overall appearances total less than 12. For anyone unfamiliar with him, this link should tell you pretty much all there is to know about him. http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/darenuke.htm Also, this is a great site for those curious about some of the more obscure characters that have appeared in the Marvel Universe. Odin's Beard

[edit] Relationships

Shouldn't there be a small section on Wolverine's relations with other characters? Such as Jean, Jubilee and(from what I know, in the movies) Rogue?

Don't forget his clone, I don't if it's true, I've only heard about it.

You mean X-23? Ace Class Shadow 19:02, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] another co-creator?

From "Marvel: Five Fabulous Decades of the World's Greatest Comics" by Les Daniels, p. 166: "I took Len Wein to lunch one day," says Roy Thomas, "and we talked about how to create a Canadian character for the comics, because we had a fair amount of sales there. I thought Wolverine was a good name, and I said I wanted him to be a little, scrappy guy. Then I left it to Len."

[edit] Redundant Information

I think the last paragraph of Publication History should be deleted, as the information there is already present in the 4th paragraph of the article. AltrEgo2001 22:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wolverine In Other Media

Although I do commend the author for the extensive research involved in this portion of the Wolverine article, I think this should be edited so as to not sound like an 8th grade book report. I'll do it if no one else wants to, but with the interest in the new movie I'm sure someone more adept at writing Wiki articles will see the grammatical errors and take care of it. AltrEgo2001 23:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Powers and abilities

The New powers and abilities section too long (see past dissusions), why do we need it?T-1000 02:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edits look good to me. I like Wolverine and all, but that section was a bit fancrufty.--DCAnderson 02:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I trimmed a bit of Odin's Beard's edits, such as the reference to Spider-Man. T-1000 02:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I got no problem with a few trims here and there. I edited the section mostly because it all just looked so jumbled and thrown together without any real sense of organization. I also felt that a little detail was needed, nothing outrageous or anything. And yeah, the Spider-Man reference was unnecessary, didn't really think about it at the time. Just popped into my head and sounded good at the time. And DCAnderson, c'mon, let's not bring any sort of fanboy references into this. It's a bit of a cheap shot. I think it's fairly safe to assume that all of us who contribute to these articles, read them, and/or take time out of our lives to provide acurate details to them are "fanboys" of some type, otherwise we wouldn't bother. Odin's Beard

I'd like to note that given the way that Wolverine is written currently, he is virtually immortal. I think it is fair to note since the character is able to survive complete absence of tissue, whole organs, blood count and nervous system by regenerating - this would be fair to say that the character is virtually immortal at this point. (IE Any creature that could survive and regenerate itself wholly after being incinerated down to a skeleton would be a fair candiate to being identified something that cannot die. Thusly Wolverine can be noted being by virture: "immortal". I think this is relevent and should be allowed to be posted. Hokgwai--Hokgwai 06:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Please provide a citation noting that Wolverine is immortal. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 07:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
As ChrisGriswold said, you'd need to cite a source. You might want to wait until Wolverine #48 is published before adding information on this - it's being solicited as an explanation for recent events ("Logan’s survived a plane crash, near-decapitation and being burned alive. The question is... HOW?"). As ever, solicitation text is unreliable, but... --Mrph 08:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Immortality is defined as the concept of existing for a potentially infinite, or indeterminate, length of time. Or as Merriam Webster's ditionary defines is "being exempt from death".[1]

I noted that Wolverine was "virtually" immortal. Given his current abilities, I think it's fair to say anyone who could regenerate their bodies from just a skeleton would classify as at not being able to die by any conventional means. Thusly, being virtually immortal.Hokgwai--Hokgwai 08:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

"Fair to say" or not, that's independent analysis, which constitutes original research. As for whether it's fair to say, he has aged since gaining his powers, meaning he may die of old age and would not then be immortal. However, that's speculation which also doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Your attempt to better the article is appreciated, but please stick to statements and analysis from reputable secondary sources. --NewtΨΦ 13:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

It was not stated that he could not die at ever. (old age or otherwise) But given the way the character is being written recently his abilities are nearing immortality. The character now currently is capable of feats that would have killed or even obliterated him before. (IE "Days of Future Past" storyline) Perhaps this is a matter of semantics. Please note the difference between "virtually immortal" and "immortal". Thanks for your keen efforts in trying to keep this honest.--Hokgwai 13:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

However Mrph did make a good point. Since it will be explained how he was able to regenerate from merely a skeleton in Wolverine #48, maybe the notation of that occurence should be deleted from the Powers and Abilities section. It may be explained that his rengeneration from virtually nothing had nothing to do with his healing factor and might be attributed to some outside intervention. All things are possible within the realm of comics.--Hokgwai 14:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Your explanations are a result of independent analysis or speculation neither of which should be added to a Wikipedia article. Please do not add uncited analysis to the article. --NewtΨΦ 17:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Quotation from the MARVEL Directory: Wolverine is not immortal, however. If the injuries are extensive enough, especially if they result in the loss of vital organs, large amounts of blood, and/or loss of physical form (such as having flesh burned away by fire or acid), Logan can die. [2]

Wolverine current healing factor abilities have has displayed a direct contradiction of this official statement. Therefore it can be said Wolverine's abilities are making him "virtually immortal." Not truly immortal but "virtually" immortal. --Hokgwai 23:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

No, although it can perhaps be said that in Wolverine, volume 3, #43 he regenerated from a skeleton - something that is well beyond the previously established limits of his healing factor. It can also be said that solicitation text from Marvel has since acknowledged that this is not consistent with the way his powers have been depicted in the past, and have stated that this will be addressed as a plot point in Wolverine, volume 3, #48. Or words to that effect. --Mrph 00:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Hokgwai, please read policy before adding this again. You are introducing your own analysis of what happened in a comic book, this fails Wikipedia's policy against original research. Further, it may not even have been Wolverine, and stranger things have happened in comic books. Until it's explained, any reporting of the event as Wolverine surviving being incinerated to his skeleton would be speculation, and Wikipedia is not the place for speculation. --NewtΨΦ 00:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
That's assuming that his healing factor would keep him alive indefinitely, too. That's a fairly huge assumption. For all we know, it gives out after a few hundred or thousand years. A long time, yes, but hardly in the immortal league. CovenantD 01:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


Newt I agree with you. I suggest removing the notation of being able to regenerate from a skeleton listed under his Powers and Abilities.--Hokgwai 04:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CITATIONS!?

Why are you people getting your knickers in a twist! You want to put citations for a comic character! The fact that should be a concern, its' frivelous and pointless. And the fact that comics have rectons whenever, who knows what citation would be rendered useless. And don't worry, its not like a University Professor is going to see one minor mistake of continiuty on this Wolverine profile,and then castrate the website. Just fix it if it has a mistake, and that will be that. Don't overcomplicate matters.

I was hoping to work the article up to Good article status. At the very least, it is Wikipedia policy. It is especially important for the parts about the IRL things (ie what the comic creators have said abot him)--DCAnderson 04:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

A blind eye could be turned to the fiction side of things (though an issue number would be nice), but things like that the creators originally intended for him to actully be a mutant wolverine need to be referenced.--DCAnderson 04:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It's necessary to have issue numbers and to keep an out-of-universe perspective in order to help maintain fair use. The entire article should have citations, without them, the claims and statements in the article are not verifiable and we stand a strong possibility of merely paraphrasing fiction, which is copyright infringement. Please read up on policy and guidelines before ranting. --Newt ΨΦ 18:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tired of fixing grammar

the section I said might have been vandalized (see page history around the timestamp I sign with here) had many minor problems seemingly introduced, which I've gotten tired of fixing as I was reading it. Someone should go through the page history and see if someone vandalized this section inconspicuously. A lot of the sentences just don't make sense now. 87.97.8.232 15:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] tired of fixing grammer.

the section I said might have been vandalized (see page history around the timestamp I sign with here) had many minor problems seemingly introduced, which I've gotten tired of fixing as I was reading it. Someone should go through the page history and see if someone vandalized this section inconspicuously. A lot of the sentences just don't make sense now. 87.97.8.232 15:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Gahck and Erista, Tribe wife and son

Erista, wolverine's son, wasn't listed under relatives. Some of you may not even know he existed so please visit http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix3/gahcksavland.htm before even considering editing this out. Also if someone does i'd appreciate the help in arguing for it to stay. I don't think there'll be much of an issue here, but you never know, this IS wikipedia... Btw i know she's not his wife, and so i didnt list Gahck under it. Also they're from Wolverine: The Jungle Adventure if u want a comic reference — ChocolateRoses talk

You're right, I completely forgot about that. I don't believe that Wolverine even knows about his son but I agree that he should be included under the relatives section. Odin's Beard

Hey, could this son be Sabreclaw from the alternate universe MC2. I read somewhere that Sabreclaw was Wolverine's son with a woman from the Savage land, and I saw Erista's picture and he has the same complextion and hair color as Sabreclaw.

[edit] Extensive Edits

Whew! I just did some extensive edits on Wolverine's history. Hope you all enjoy! Solofire6 01:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wolverine reflexes

In the comics powers/abilities it doesn't state that wolverine has superhuman reflexes, or enhanced reaction timing ?

It's stated that his agility and relfexes are enhanced to levels that are beyond the human body's natural limits. Sounds superhuman to me. Odin's Beard 14:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't it beyond NORMAL human??(which isn't superhuman) Click on the second link under "(disputed! read below)" above^. I'd say he counts more as enhanced than superhuman. — ChocolateRoses talk

[edit] Skrull Wolverine

There was a period of time where Wolverine was apparently replaced by a Skrull. Does anyone know what that was all about or how long it lasted? - HKMARKS 02:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Apocalypse had aquiared a number of Skrull servants during The Twelve storyline. The Twelve storyline involved Apocalypse sending his minions, including new Horsemen and Skrulls to capture twelve mutants so that he could basically absorb their powers and add them to his own to gain some form of omnipotence. Prior to this storyline, the X-Men were returning from an adventure in space and were ambushed by Skrulls serving Apocalypse. Everyone was rendered unconscious, I forget how exactly, but there wasn't some great battle I don't believe. Wolverine was taken and a Skrull was left in his place to impersonate Wolverine and to sort of help rip the X-Men apart from the inside. This Skrull had been trained for quite a long time not only to use his powers to look like Wolverine, but he had to learn to mold his personality, his manner of speech, his mannerisms, etc. in order to be convincing. The Skrull did his job perfectly, he looked, sounded, and behaved exactly as Wolverine. Even Xavier could tell no difference. The Skrull maintained this illusion for weeks, maybe even months, partly because he was able to avoid most dangerous situations. although some were unavoidable. The Skrulls are unable to duplicate a mutant's powers, at least powers that are somewhat complicated. Skrulls are unable to duplicate the X-gene. The Skrull was able to morph bone claws but didn't possess Wolverine's superhuman senses, enhanced physical abilities, or his mutant healing factor. Eventually, this imposter Wolverine accompanied a team of X-Men consisting of Colossus, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Cable, and Rogue I believe in opposing one of Apocalypse's Horsemen, the Horseman known as Death. Death was a mysterious figure, powerfully built, wearing armor and a read cloack with some kind of scarf that completely concealed his head and facial features. Death also carried a scimitar-like sword with a very logn and widely curved blade. Death defeated the X-Men and ran "Wolverine" through with this sword, killing him. Death would later turn out to be the actual Wolverine and the Skrull imposter was discovered as Beast was performing an autopsy as to why the imposter Wolverine, who they still believed to actually be Wolverine at this time, had died. It was revealed that despite being a perfect genetic match to Wolverine, the individual laid out in the medical lab had no X-Factor in his genes, meaning that not only was he not Wolverine, but he wasn't even a mutant. Fans have since referred to this Skrull imposter as Skrullverine. As for how long it lasted, I'm not certain exactly of how many issues. Wolverine made an appearance as Death, under Apocalypse's control, in about three issues of his own montly title. Odin's Beard 17:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


yeah i didnt like that stories - skrulls are very resilient and have some form of healing factor due to their shapeshifting. Just listen to what wolverine says about them in Young Avengers #12! — ChocolateRoses talk

[edit] Being burned to a skeleton?

Someone keeps adding to the powers and abilities section that Wolverine has regenerated completely from having the flesh burned from his body, leaving nothing but his bones. The only instance I know of where the flesh was instantly incinerated from his body was during the Days of Future Past storyline and that's an alternate universe. When else has this occurred and is it canon? Odin's Beard 17:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That's me and others - it's there on the page - Wolverine 43, the latest issue.

http://cgknight.f2s.com/wolverineburnt1.jpg

http://cgknight.f2s.com/wolverineburnt2.jpg

--Charlesknight 17:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering if it might be the new issue, I haven't picked it up yet. Thanks for the heads up. Guess that ends the old debate as to whether or not he can regenerate missing limbs and vital organs. Odin's Beard 18:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Keep it there for now, but seing as that was last issue, im still hoping for a better explanation. Lots of fans on comic boards online are a bit pissed off at this. It's a total change in ability really -- this means (1) he's immortal and (2) where the frick did he get the energy from to do this?? It used to be he needed the energy from food within him. — ChocolateRoses talk

68.38.132.19 18:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)I think it is safe to assume that the Wolverine's skeleton kept his brain unharmed and so he used those cells to recreate his intire body. It is the only way that part with Nitro makes sense

It's creative licencing. It says in the article that the level of his healing factor has varied from writer to writer. This is the highest his hf has ever been writen though, and may cause a few problems continuty wise. JQF 23:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Power and abilities

The Powers and abilities section is too long again. Needs some trimming. T-1000 19:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Odin's beard, please talk about the changes before you make them. T-1000 02:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I accidentally removed the picture. I was attempting to fix the statement made under the picture that was shown because it stated that it was Wolverine regenerating after being reduced to a skeleton while the picture was actually the same picture of Wolverine being shot that's been there for the past 6 months. I'm not familiar with adding pictures to articles, never done it before. I wasn't making changes, just made a mistake. As to the section being too long, how is adding one more line, which contails relevant information, making the article too long? Lighten the hell up man. Odin's Beard 16:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

68.38.132.19 18:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC) I think it is safe to assume that the Wolverine's skeleton kept his brain unharmed and so he used those cells to recreate his entire body. It is the only way that part with Nitro makes sense

[edit] Wolverine claws

From what i had understood, there are no holes for his claws to comme out,like a animals claws , they each time slise throue the flesh ,and then his healing capabilities close the holes, when they are retracted.In the first movie , when Rogue ask him if it heart when they come out ,he replies "every time".Is this the only technical explanation of the subject.--87.64.6.217 12:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty much. There are no permanent holes for the claws to come out. They're housed in his forearms and pop out between his knuckles. Each time they're popped out or retracted, they leave large holes behind that are healed instantly, but that doesn't prevent him from feeling pain. Wolverine's tolerance for pain is much higher than that of most people, he's used to it, and he's endured so much of it that it's easy for him to cope. Odin's Beard 14:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Not only this, but I imagine that the pain would be very brief, in spite of its intensity, due to the healing factor.

Something that could be brought up in the article is the variety of ways in which Wolverine's claws have been depicted over the character's existence, as well as a note about the anatomical impossibility of some of the depictions in the comics and the X-ray in the first film. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, in most depictions I've seen, they rest -atop- his hands, as if glued there, when there's no way they could have come out of his forearms at that angle, then 'corrected' to the parallel angle. The movie version seems to have them between his knuckles, which makes more sense
Find a reputable source that speaks about this before adding it to the article. We can synthesize outside sources, but we cannot make our own judgments. We report facts, we don't analyze them. --Newt ΨΦ 20:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
To address the "how they come out" issue: As I understand Wolverine's anatomy, the claws sit on top of his forearm bones, and extend straight out and in when extruded and retracted. If he held his hands parallel to his arms when popping the claws, they would probably come out directly between his knuckles, as they do in the movies. However, in most of the pictures I've seen that I can remember, Wolverine flexes his wrists slightly so that the claws emerge from the backs of his hands (and thus through the sockets on his gloves). If the claws are cylindrical or oblong in cross-section, as the bone claws are usually depicted as being, they would most likely badly distort his hands when "popped" if they came out directly between his knuckles; thus, the "between the knuckles" thing only really works if the claws are blades, like in the movies or in the case of X-23. It's worth noting for this discussion that the X-ray from the first film doesn't make any logical sense, as his forearms would be visibly malformed with the ulna and radius pushed apart to make room for the claw mechanism...also, since the claw tips extend into his hand in the X-ray, he couldn't bend his hands without constantly cutting them wide open. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pic of Wolverine being reduced to a skeleton

Someone keeps removing the picture from the powers and abilities section displaying Wolverine being reduced to his skeleton after Nitro uses his powers against him. This same person states that in #44, it's revealed that it wasn't Wolverine but a SHIELD Life Decoy. I've just been to Marvel.com and Wolverine #44 doesn't even hit stores until July 26, so how does this person know that it was a Life Decoy? Until the issue hits shelves and verifies this claim, I'll just keep adding the picture back. And lay off the name calling. It's immature, idiotic, and has no place here. Odin's Beard 00:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's a third opinion: leave out the pic and the talk about regenerating from a skeleton until the next issue actually hits the stands. CovenantD 01:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, since it would be OR at this point. T-1000 21:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
What's the resolution on that pic, by the way? Fair use tag says "low resolution" images are believed to be okay. --Newt ΨΦ

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball - nobody has seen 44 - so I say we leave in it and then we can ALTER it if it turns out to be a LMD or a drug-induced coma or whatever. And people throwing around words like "retarded" should remember what Wikipedia says about civility to other editors.

--Charlesknight 17:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree about the name-calling thing, but yeah i don't think that was wolverine. People have links to the comic industry and people read issues weeks before theyre out. i believe this "rumour" — ChocolateRoses talk

Well it seems you were wrong and this is a good example of why wikipedia is NOT a crystal ball. --Charlesknight 23:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

According to a preview on www.wizarduniverse.com, there's some artwork samplings and in one of them, it shows a mysterious figure wearing some cloak with a hood with two small red eyes and numerous drawings of Logan, including a close up of one of his eyes. A tear is flowing out of the eye and you can see the cloaked figure being reflected. Could it be Marvel's version of Death? http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/wizard/002167948.cfm Down at the bottom, the third one.

[edit] Movie

I added the announcement of the movie following the press release on the Empire film site though I don't know if it is in the right place or not. Fell free to move it somewhere more appropriate.Schnizzle 15:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Ignore me its in there all ready I've deleted my edited.Schnizzle 15:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glenn Danzig

Is the fact that he was considered for playing Wolverine in an X-Men film back during the 1990s really all that noteworthy, especially considering that the article section is devoted to music? To my knowledge, and if I'm wrong let me know, the Wolverine character hasn't been immortalized in a song, there isn't a band or artist that uses Wolverine as a stage name, etc. Odin's Beard 01:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Entombed's album Wolverine Blues had him on the album cover, and while the song doesn't explicitely say anything, I think the vid had one of the members in a wolvie shirt and the lyrics could vaguely be Wolverine related. -August 11, 2006

Find a reliable source and add it. --Chris Griswold 08:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

Per WP:CMC, Ultimate character articles should be merged into those of their Marvel Universe counterparts. --Chris Griswold 22:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

  • Merge -- Chris Griswold 22:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge: Might as well merge them, it's happening to all the other articles with the Ultimate characters. Some parts of the article could stand a little trimming I believe. I think that most of the section about alternate versions of the character isn't all that necessary or at the very least could use some major trimming. That particular section looks as if it takes up almost as much article space as the publication and character history. Odin's Beard 23:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge as soon as this article is condensed. It might save us from having to constantly remove the speculation about how Ultimate Adamantium might be weaker than 616 Adamantium. --Newt ΨΦ 01:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - WHAT?! I just got a nose bleed. Thanks. --Chris Griswold 01:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Separate - The article has so much information, the addition would make an already extensive article too busy. I feel the article should be kept the way it is, a brief summary with a link to the already existing Ultimate article. --66.109.248.114, August 8, 2006.
  • Merge -HKMARKS 23:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion closed. Result was: MERGE --Chris Griswold 01:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

  • The page should be kept for the upcoming miniseries. --Jamdav86 15:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merged

  • First attempt at merge has now been done, text could do with editing down a little but I don't think anything important has been lost in the move. --Mrph 23:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eastwood influence?

I'm not an X-pert though I used to read the comics often. I challenge anyone to watch the Man with No Name trilogy and not find influences Eastwood's character(s) have had on Wolverine's personality and mannerisms. Is there no available information on this? 151.205.35.249 07:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

There is for Hugh Jackman's version. Look here, here, and here. --Newt ΨΦ 15:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I think the fact that Singer asked him to watch Eastwood films shows that this isn't a shot in the dark, and I don't really see that people are accusing Jackman as being a gross deviant from the comics in any real sense. The problem is I don't personally know who is responsible for the fundamental development of Wolverine as we know him and then at that point how to divine their inspiration. It almost seems self-evident though. 141.153.123.195 16:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Self-evident is POV and asserting this is speculation w/out citations, which I'm sure you realize. I guess it's more "Were Len Wein and Chris Claremont inspired by Clint Eastwood?" then. I tried googling and could only find a vague reference. --Newt ΨΦ 17:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The character's personality is very similar to the personalities of some of Eastwood's most famous roles, including the Man With No Name from the Spaghetti Westerns and Dirty Harry Calahan. I've heard lots of people say the character's personality is an amalgam of many of the characters portrayed by John Wayne, James Dean, and Clint Eastwood. But, I don't believe it can be stated officially. While the influence is there, to include it in the article is more along the lines of POV rather than a generally known and accepted fact. As Newt said, only an exceptionally vague reference was found. Odin's Beard 00:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I seem to remember, some time ago, Wolvie giving a Dirty Harry-style speech about how deadly his claws were to some thug, and overcoming him with pure intimidation. I have also read somewhere that the writers in the 70s and 80s did adapt lots of his personality from westerns, especially Clint Eastwood. Can't find a reference quite yet though. --Switch 11:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Navbox Guidelines

Please follow this link Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates/navboxes to join in on the discussion . --Basique 12:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origin

I'm of the understanding we are to limit plot synopses in articles of fictional characters to brief summaries. That said, I also believe that including the entire plot to a limited series is not necessary to the understanding of this character. I think Origin section should be worded entirely differently; something like: "The 2006 Marvel Comics limited series Origin reveals much of Wolverine's history previously left a mystery. Set in the 19th century and depicting Wolverine as sickly young boy named James Howlett, the series establishes that Wolverine is over 100 years old and reveals that "Logan" is not Wolverine's real name..." and so on. This would put the section in an out-of-universe perspective, more in line with WP:WAF and easier to argue fair use. However, I realize my previous edit was a bit nonsensical. Overall, this article needs to be condensed, that was just my first (albeit poorly executed) step. --Newt ΨΦ 21:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that you're trimming so much that an average reader won't understand what those paragraphs are talking about. T-1000 21:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I said as much in the opener for this discussion (see above: "a bit nonsensical", "poorly executed"). I'll see if I can't make a more sensible edit later :) --Newt ΨΦ 21:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
As an aside, I'm somewhat surprised that there isn't an article for Origin. It's a significant (understatement!) storyline for one of Marvel's most popular characters. If we could spin off the reverted copy into an article about the story, I think both camps would be adequately happy. I'd be bold and do it, but I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough about the story to be comfortable doing it. EVula 21:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd agree with this, though I would hope that such an article would be more than a mere repository for the plot of the series, and have a bit of secondary analysis and critical and fan response as well as some development and behind-the-scenes-ness. --Newt ΨΦ 21:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I consider that a given. I wasn't suggesting the disputed content become the entire article, just serve as the jumping-off point for one. EVula 02:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
It could be a very good article if media coverage is factored in. It was a big deal for Marvel to reveal that origin; there was a fear it was going to ruin one of Marvel's most popular characters. --Chris Griswold 03:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
The common practice with the limited series articles is to just list the summaries and leave them so far as I've seen. At least the more recent ones. That was why I offered the caveat, not because I didn't figure you knew. --Newt ΨΦ 04:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Powers and OHOTMU

I noticed an additional in-line comment added after mine discussing some of Wolverine's uncited powers. OHOTMU statistics are generally frowned upon by WP:COMIC editors (see: here and here). As I understand it, if certain fictional facts are found only in the OHOTMU, then it is difficult to argue WP:FU. Basically, fictional facts are not facts per se (independently verifiable separate from the reporting source) but fiction, and rewriting or paraphrasing fiction is not transformative. As the OHOTMU is an encyclopedic source (albeit of fictional facts) we are a competing product (a free encyclopedia) and since we are in no way transforming this fictional material then we are infringing on the OHOTMU's copyright. I'm not against these powers being listed, however, if we could get an issue of a comic book where a character states that Wolverine can endure strenuous activity for days, or where he is depicted lifting greater weight than a human of his stature would reasonably be able to, I'd be a lot more comfortable and the article would be more in line with WP:CMC editorial guidelines. --Newt ΨΦ 14:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to admit that I'm confused. I've red posts by editors stating that by including things taken from the OHOTMU results in copyright infringement. However, if that's the case, then isn't copyright being violated by even having articles about Marvel characters anyhow? The articles contain most of the same information including a fictional character biography and detailed description of whatever superhuman powers a character has, just as the OHOTMU. As you stated earlier, the OHOTMU is an encyclopedic tool so isn't copyright being violated? Anyone could come to Wikipedia and read the same information for free rather than pay three bucks for an issue of the OHOTMU. Odin's Beard 23:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Which is why we shouldn't include information from the OHOTMU, or at least information only found in the OHOTMU, and definitely not report information only found in the OHOTMU in the same manner the OHOTMU reports it. We're not supposed to be a replacement for the OHOTMU, which offers an in-universe history of the character. We're supposed to relate the character as a phenomenon (not a person) and note its effects on the real world. Read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). It should give you an idea of what Wikipedia's goal is, and the problems with much of the comic book articles. --Newt ΨΦ 02:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

It still doesn't really answer my question, I don't know maybe I'm just not getting it. I fail to see how using information taken from one Marvel publication, namely the OHOTMU, violates copyright when using information taken from other Marvel publications doesn't. Say, for the sake of argument, that an issue of the OHOTMU states that Namor can lift approximately 100 tons. Now, if it's mentioned in the article, it's a violation of copyright. But if an issue of regular monthly comic book or a mini-series that's canon is mentioned in the article stating that he can lift approximately 100 tons, then it's not a violation of copyright? Sorry, I just don't see the difference. Odin's Beard 00:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Look up fair use. Better yet, here's an excerpt:
"In general four factors must be considered:
  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The difference is this is an encyclopedia, and so is the OHOTMU. Our product is thus possibly competition for the OHOTMU, and it's free. If we keep the plot summaries to a minimum, we're not a competing product with the comics or we at least offer less competition. --Newt ΨΦ 00:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First Appearance

I've just removed the parts of the article saying that he 'appears in the shadows' or does not 'fully appear' in Hulk #180. In that issue he quite clearly gets a full body shot and gets some lines. This website features the evidence.Jayunderscorezero 11:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

If Marvel's official position is that Wolverine's first "true" appearance occurred in Hulk #181, then it doesn't matter what this website says. To say otherwise in the article is substituting opinion for accepted fact. If Marvel's position is that his appearance was a cameo or whatever, then that's what has to be written in the article. Odin's Beard 23:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

But it's entirely verifable that the first appearance of the character called Wolverine was in issue 180 - as long as we don't say it's his first OFFICIAL appearance, then I don't see a problem with either verifibility or what marvel is saying. --Charlesknight 23:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

There's always the "While Wolverine can be seen in issue #180, Marvel Comics official position is that he did not appear until #181" --NewtΨΦ 01:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I see your point Odin's Beard. However, I think it's sensible to at least remove references to him 'appearing in the shadows' or being otherwise obscured in #180 when that is clearly not the case in the actual issue. Agreed?Jayunderscorezero 09:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC) And yes, I very much agree with Newt on this oneJayunderscorezero 09:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Works for me, and I don't have any problem removing the reference to him "appearing in the shadows" since he was clearly shown. Odin's Beard 00:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rarely kills

I've removed this sentence:

"Logan -- he can incapacitate, immobilize... maim and cripple a hundred ways. But he rarely kills. If you don't believe it - check their heartbeats."

That might have been the case, 15 years ago but does not seem to hold true those days. Wolverine kills a lot of people (mainly nameless henchmen but still...)

--Charlesknight 10:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought about removing it myself, even though it does hold some ring of truth. He does have respect for life, at least until someone does something that offends his sense of personal honor or takes innocent life or tries to kill him. Even if it's next to impossible to kill him, and he knows this full well, he does have a tendency to respond in kind. Odin's Beard 23:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


It's a constraint of the narrative form - you want to say that Wolverine does not enjoy it but then he has to slash up a certain number of people every issue to get the reader to come back. It's similar to him being the "best at what he does" but failing to kill anyone of note :) --Charlesknight 15:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
The word rarely applies to killing differently than it applies to something like eating chocolate ice cream. I've probably eaten fewer bowlfuls of chocolate ice cream than the number of times Wolverine has killed people. In real life, would you ever say someone who has killed dozens, maybe hundreds of people rarely kills? No bloody way. Doczilla 19:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Counting weapon numbers

Confused slightly. Is Bradley was weapon 0, doesn't that make Weapon X the 11th weapon? JoshuaZ 13:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Why? Also, can we get a citation on Bradley being 0? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 14:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion: Meta

What does the speech balloon on top of the index mean, and why is he on the archives?--SidiLemine 15:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

OK. Now I see where it's from. That must be from my browser, but this balloon keeps jumping everywhere... Is something wrong with the tmplate?--SidiLemine 15:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Atheist?

i noticed Wolverine is listed under "fictional atheists" at the end of the X-men animated series episode "Nightcrawler" hes shown reading from a Bible and praying, allowing God into his heart. how could Logan still be considered an atheist?

The X-Men Animated Series isn't canon, has nothing to do with what goes on in the mainstream Marvel Universe as it refers to comics, neither do the movies. Wolverine, in the comics, kind of "flirted" with Christianity during World War I after he began seeing a woman named Janet. Cyber, one of Wolverine's earliest enemies and his commanding officer during WWI, murdered Janet, for some unrevealed reason, and Wolverine confronted him only to be severely beaten and left for dead. I suppose that someone as devout and good as Janet, to Wolverine, shattered his faith in Christianity. As far as the other religions of the world goes, Wolverine has never shown or announced any sort of affiliation with them. I think that it was in Uncanny X-Men #159 that the X-Men first tangled with Marvel's version of Dracula. Wolverine attempted to use a crucifix against him but it had no effect, I think that either Wolverine himself or it was just written in that Wolverine using religious icons on Dracula wouldn't work due to him being an athiest. Odin's Beard 01:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

hey man...thanks for the info Dick Grayson

[edit] Pub histor vs. character

The significance of Origin and "Weapon X" are lost within the context of the character history. Their significance is the breakthrough of new backstory after years of confusion, but that is lost when used chronologically by continuity. I'd say that the publicaton significance to the character at least rivals its effect on the character storywise. Any suggestions on how to move/split this material so it makes more sense?--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The publication of Origin and Barry Windsor-Smith's "Weapon X" should be mentioned in the historical context of Publishing History, but the actual details (that Logan is really James Howlett, his subjectment to the Weapon X project, etc.) should be in the character bio. WesleyDodds
Ok, i've just thought of something: rename "Wolverine's intended origin" to something that can encompass what's already there while also adding mentions of the publications of Origin and "Weapon X" as an extra pargraph. Because the character's murky background has long since part of the intrigue that interested readers. WesleyDodds

[edit] Wolverine's daddy complex

Should there be a specific section dedicated (or, more importantly, is there anything written in a secondary source) about how Wolverine seems to have a penchant for taking young mutant (and non-mutant) coeds under his wing and protecting them? This I guess is the "Unkie Wogan" I've heard in passing, but editing this rather sprawling history down I've noticed at least three instances: Jubilee, Shadowcat, and Amiko, not to mention the movie version's relationship with Rogue. Just a thought. --NewtΨΦ 00:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't really see a need for a special section just for the purpose of acknowledging that he has a tendency to look after strays, so to speak. He's not exactly a role model, but does offer advice or look after younger and naive people who get themselves into trouble. If there was a specific reason that he looked after "kids", like on a subconscious psychological level, then maybe. But, as far as I know, nothing has ever been written to explain why he does it other than the obvious: he'll occassionally run across a lonely, scared, and confused kid that thinks or feels he or she is all along in the world and has no idea where to turn. He's a mentor...that smokes, drinks, gambles, and kills....a lot. Odin's Beard 00:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

It should be mentioned if you can find a source that talks about it, like an op-ed column or an article in Wizard. WesleyDodds 02:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
My main concern is taking stuff unimportant to his biography (but possibly important to his character) out of his biography. His meeting Amiko Kobayashi seems very out of place, for example. --NewtΨΦ 02:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writers and issues

While I understand I'm working on editing the "biography" section which people prefer to write entirely in-universe, I do not think that "Chris Claremont and other writers have added layers of complexity..." is entirely enlightening nor fair to Claremont or the other writers of Wolverine. I've also added some issue tags because all this jumping around from Canada to Japan to Australia without any context as to the time period, who was writing it, why he's there, and loosely connecting these places by adding "later" in strategic places is rather shoddy and only minimally informative. --NewtΨΦ 00:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bone claws

I was just wondering if Wolverine actually sharpens his bone claws? Most depictions I've seen of them portray them no where as sharp as his original adamantium claws, and they look like the only thing they'd be good for is stabbing.141.157.217.34 19:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, since his bone claws are once more laced with adamantium, it's a question that'll never probably be answered. Nothing was ever shown in the comics, or even mentioned for that matter. As far as I know, it's something that's never really come up. I suppose most people just suspected that the claws just kept a natural edge, maybe because of their shape or something. Maybe he used something for a scratching posts like cats do to keep their claws sharp. *shrug* Odin's Beard 23:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can remember, the only time that the claws have been depicted as truly cutting are when the artist depicts the claws as blades, which isn't accurate at all. It's always been my assumption that the claws were naturally shaped to have a bit of an edge, as well as extremely sharp tips, but that they would tear and rend like a cat's claws rather than cutting through objects. I've been thinking that the article could use a paragraph or two talking about the claws themselves; that might be a good place to address this issue. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Naturally yes, that's how the bone claws should have functioned but this is a fictional comic book character after all. The typical laws of nature don't exactly mean very much in comic books. One could argue that Wolverine's bones are naturally denser than those of an ordinary human, which could help add to the bone claws' edge. There's no real answer to the question, just speculation because it's never been addressed by Marvel. Without the naturally sharp edge to them, they'd be spikes rather than claws. In fact, they were drawn in some instances to look more like spikes while some artists drew them retaining their traditional shape. Odin's Beard 23:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
It really does depend on the artist. I've seen the claws shown as conical, like real claws, or as blades. The very famous cover to his first limited series, for example, has the claws clearly shown as blades, but the current comics seem to show them as real (pointed, not blade) claws instead. In 'Origin, they looked like real (pointed) claws. Maybe the sharp edge was given to them in the adamantium bonding process. But, really, we'll probably never know the "official" shape of the claws. --Switch 11:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Logic check

For adamantium to be "toxic", it would have to be, in some way, chemically reactive. If it were chemically reactive, it could not possibly be indestructable. Therefore, "adamantium poisoning" should be impossible. Chaotic nipple 00:31, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I think the original story handling this - an X-Men issue where Wolverine's powers were cancelled for days/weeks - treated the problem differently. It wasn't that adamantium was toxic, it was that Wolverine had a metal skeleton with no functioning bone marrow. This would have been the first Genosha storyline, which that article identifies as starting in Uncanny X-Men #235. If anyone's got the issues, we can probably settle this... --Mrph 00:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
In Uncanny X-Men #380, in a storyline involving the High Evolutionary using his technology to supress the mutant abilities of every mutant on Earth, Wolverine explicitly states that he is dying of adamantium poisoning. I'll have to look it up, but I believe he also stated the same thing during an issue of his own monthly series that was taking place alongside the X-Men storyline. The thing is nipple, logic doesn't always apply when it comes to comic books. The Marvel Universe is ficticious, they can do whatever they want to it. All you have to do is open any comic book on the market, by any comic book company, and you'll see every natural law tossed out the window. For instance, adamantium can withstand nuclear explosions without so much as a scratch, which makes it vastly harder than even diamonds, and diamonds are the hardest substance in nature. There are beings in the Marvel Universe that will never grow old, can fly through space and survive unaided and even go faster than light, and it goes on and on. Logic, simply doesn't apply. Odin's Beard 23:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
"The thing is nipple"? You might want to take a wikibreak and go do whatever it is you need to. Come back when you've gotten it out of your system. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 07:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Sounds as if you're the one that's got some sort of problem. Chaotic nipple is the editor's nick, I just used nipple instead of just saying the typing the whole nick. Nothing disrespectful going on. Get the fact before jumping to conclusions before you decide to lecture somebody. Odin's Beard 23:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Get over yourself. It was a joke. And learn to use punctuation better.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 02:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Logan's skeleton is not made entirely of Adamantium. Rather, the Adamantium/Skeletal Bonding Process (created by the Japanese mad scientist Kenji "Lord DarkWind" Oyama) that Logan was subjected to during "Experiment X" only chrome-plates the metal to the outermost layers of calcium specific to the human skeleton. Red blood cell production of the bone marrow is not affected by the metal. Without an accelerated Healing-Factor, the subject would die from the traumatic shock induced by the brutal Bonding-Process. The metal on Logan's skeleton is viewed as a foriegn substance by his Healing-Factor, which constantly devotes tremendous effort to remove it from his body. 68.211.204.190 23:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Super Strength

This is getting to be a big problem. I have removed Wolverine from the category Category:Marvel Comics mutants with superhuman strength twice now. Wolverine does NOT have super strength within the stipulations of the category Category:fictional characters with superhuman strength. After it was nomiated for deletion several guidelines were set up to make the category easier to manage. One of those is that "the benchmark between those with superhuman strength and those who are simple very strong is roughly one ton." Those like Captain America and Wolverine comes no where near havinge super strength within this guideline. Wolverine being stronger than the average human is irrelevent. I hope this clears everything up and I would apretiate it fi people would STOP adding him back to the category. (Animedude 07:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC))

I was following the category description until "roughly one ton" which then makes "superhuman strength" a neologism until we can find a source for that definition. What is greater than human is a bit more ephemeral than that, I'd say. --NewtΨΦ 15:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
It is actually the rule of the marvel Universe and is in their handbooks. But this rule was mostly set to keep theis category from becoming too crowded. Without guidelines, almost EVERY fictional character (especially in comic books) could be considered super strong, as they have shown strength far greater than an "normal" person. Also I think it is good having a set limit to what is considered "Superhuman", meaning far greater than humans can possibly attain and "almost superhuman" being the peak of human potential. Captain America, Batman and Wolverine all fall into the "almost super human" category. Being "better than human" doesn't cut it. In real-life strong man contests, contenstants have been seen lifting 700 pounds or more. Should they be considered for this category? Byt your (loose) definition it is "more than human" as most humans cannot lift this much. Should all Olympic runners be considered to have "superhuman speed" as you and I cannot run as fast as they can? The rules are in place for a reason. (Animedude 17:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC))
If it's Marvel's definition it needs a cite. If it's not DC's then DC characters (as the parent category is applied to more than just Marvel's characters) are going to be a bit different. "The rules" were made up by Wikipedia editors and thus it constitutes a neologism. Look up "superhuman" it can mean supernatural or it can mean greater than ordinary human. It's not that easy. --NewtΨΦ 18:01, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Why is it so hard for you to accept that Wolverine doesnt have superstrenght within the confines of his own world. EVERY comic book character has show feats of strength greater than those of normal human beings in the real world. Does this mean Wolverine is an par with the Hulk? Nope. Batman is not considered to have super strength, but has on times show strength far beyond human potential. Guidelines exist for a reason. Since you wanna be picky, I will try to find a source for the one ton range.

While we can't use handbook stats, canonical comic issues have been mentioned that mention him displaying superhuman levels of strength. The newer versions of the OHOTMU do state that anything from 800 pounds up to the 25 ton range, which is where the character falls, is considered superhuman. Superhuman is meant to be anything beyond the the natural limits of an ordinary human. Maybe he can lift 900 lbs, maybe he can lift 1 ton, I don't know if an exact figure has been given. Superhuman strength doesn't always entail for a character to have the capability to lift and hurl tanks like 60 ton basketballs. If Marvel's position is that he does have some level of superhuman strength, whatver the actual amount of weight might be, then that's what has to be reported. Whether anyone agrees or disagrees with Marvel Comics' position on it is pretty much irrelevant. Odin's Beard 23:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

By this definition this would give both Captain America and DC's Batman super strength. Even though it is a character point that each of them do not have super powers. There msut be some kind of distiction, as almost every comic book character has preformed some fantastric feat which may or may not be a super power... (Animedude 04:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
First of all, Marvel's rules of what constitutes "superhuman strength" do not apply to DC characters like Batman. If writers and editors at DC want Batman to lift a city bus and say that a human at peak potential can lift a car, then that may not be "superhuman" and especially would not be for Marvel characters. As for "superhuman strength," you may be able to use the OHOTMU definition though there are copyright issues there since we're possible competitors for that product. We run the risk of regurgitating their copyrighted material for free, thus acting as a detriment to their sales and our use would not be fair. --PsyphicsΨΦ 16:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Also, there doesn't have to be some sort of distinction. Marvel's position, and there are other canon comic books to back up the position besides those listed, is that the character possesses some level of superhuman strength. DC can do whatever they wish with Batman, just as Marvel can do what they wish with their character. Captain America has demonstrated superhuman feats of strength before sure. As you mentioned, most comic bookc haracters have at some point. However, Marvel's officially states that Captain America, at least the Earth-616 version, is at the very pinnacle of human conditioning. There might be contradictory feats of strength shown in the comics from time to time, but according to the OHOTMU he isn't recognized as being superhumanly strong, while Wolverine is. Many might not agree with Marvel's position on the matter but, quite frankly, it doesn't matter. The character is their property, they can interpret everything about him in anyway they wish. Odin's Beard 00:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Religion

Okay, so Wolvie has repeatedly been removed from the category "fictional atheists". No big deal, as Wolvie's atheism has never been a particularly prominent part of his character, though he is an atheist I'm sure. But he is still in the categories "fictional Shintoists" and "fictional Buddhists". Not only is it more or less impossible to be both, as far as I can remember Wolvie was never a Shintoist, despite his time in Japan. Regardless, Shinto is essentially a dead religion, the Emperor having been depowered, so I dare say he isn't now even if he ever was. We also need a definite citation for his Buddhism, which I seem to remember being shown on and off over the years - he isn't a great Buddhist (after all, he isn't the most pacifistic character in the MU). --Switch 12:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to contest, Shinto is one of Japan's largest religions. That is all. --NewtΨΦ 12:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Self-correction: Shinto is essentially dead as an organised religion. It now makes up much of Japan's native mythology and superstition, little of which is followed, for lack of a better word, religiously. It has many followers who claim not to believe in religion. As far as I can tell, having lived in Japan for a very short while a few years ago, it is not regarded in the same way, say, Buddhism is.
For the sake of the article, Wolvie does engage in some Japanese cultural behaviours at some point or another that are derived from Shinto, so I guess it could be said he is a Shintoist. Then again, so do my parents, an atheistic Liberal Christian and a nonpracticing Catholic respectively, so what do you do? --Switch 13:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atheist

Is it possible to be an atheist in the MU? There is people that can confirm the One Above All exists. T-1000 23:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe a character in the MU could be considered an atheist in regard to the various religions of the real world that are portrayed in the comics. I don't know if anyone in the MU, or at least on Marvel's Earth, worships the One Above All. Odin's Beard 23:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the One Above All is actually worshipped, he's something that concretely exists as part of the universe. It's like believing in chairs or oxygen: you don't need to, you know they're there.
I think Iron Man is still in the fictional atheists category though. Yep, he is, I just checked. --Switch 05:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
What is the point in being an atheist or beliving in God if you already know that an omnipotent being exists? T-1000 16:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Omnipotence is a word that gets tossed around a lot in comic books. Beings like Galactus, the Celestials, the Watchers, various members of the "god" pantheons of Earth, and Eternals have boasted about being "all powerful" and all that. Many of these mentioned are close to it, at least by most standards at which anybody can think of. Perhaps out of a combination of ego and having lots of experience with superhuman and supernatural beings that Wolverine doesn't accept any of them as "gods". For every "god" he, or any other Marvel character for that matter, has encountered that claims omnipotence, they don't behave very godlike. Also, there's always a more powerful being that seems to pop up occassionally.Odin's Beard 23:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I just thought of a similar situation in Discworld. Several people there, including Commander Vimes and the Greek Philosopher-analogues, are called "atheists" (both in-universe and out) even though they know that gods exist; they just don't worship them or engage in religion. Wolverine is the same essentially. --Switch 10:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citing Sources

Wolverine was described as a "warrior-poet" in a previous incarnation of www.marvel.com before it became a wiki. Perhaps the Marvel Encyclopedia Volume 1 and Marvel Encyclopedia Volume 2: X-Men might do so as well. --68.224.247.53 19:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

It's probably best avoiding statements like "warrior-poet" because it sounds pretty close to POV, that is unless he's referred as such in a canon issue of a comic book that's not an encyclopedia like the Marvel Encyclopedia or the OHOTMU. Odin's Beard 23:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Strength of Wolverine's claws

Okay, let's get this straight, yes, adamantium has the durability to cut through nearly any substance, which, in effect, means that Wolverine's CLAWS can cut through nearly any substance. However, this does not mean that WOLVERINE can ALWAYS cut through ANY substance. Wolverine is not exactly one of the most physically powerful among most of Marvel's powerhouses. Wolverine probably has the strength to cut through substances such as concrete, but I doubt that base Wolverine has the brute strength to cut through most of the very strong suubstances, such as reinforced steel, gold, platinum, and diuamonds. And Wolverine definitely stands no chance at cutting Marvel's other famous fictional metal, vibranium. Say that you have knife made of titanium or solid gold or solid diamond. Just because it's durable enough to cut through most metals does not mean that YOU are able to do it. Wolverine's claws aren't lightsabers.

Second point to get straight, yes, Wolverine's skeleton and claws are currently made out of true adamantium. However, true adamantium is not the strongest substance in the Marvel Universe. As it has been said before, Captain America's shield is clearly stronger than true adamantium. Uru is also stronger than True Adamantium, as things such as Thor's hammer is made out of Uru, and even the gods of the Marvel Universe themselves have trouble welding Uru weapons. Also, Thor himself has been able to dent True Adamantium before. I believe True Adamantium second only to Uru in the Marvel Universe though. XtrEEmMaShEEn3k2 23:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, the article is worded in saying that Wolverine's claws are capable of cutting any known substance, other than Cap's shield and true adamantium itself. I can use a pocket knife and cut stone but I can't slice completely through the stone. It's the same with Wolverine's claws. With the exception of Cap's shield and true adamantium itself, his claws have cut any solid substance that they've gone up against. Not completely through, but they have cut it nonetheless. If there's a material that his claws can't cut, other than those mentioned, then provide a legitimate source.

However, your point about Uru sounds like POV. Granted, Thor's hammer did slightly dent a small cylinder of true adamantium, provided he hit it with all of his strength. Adamantium's durability, like that of any real alloy, somewhat depends upon how thick it is. For example, a piece of titanium 6 inches thick is going to be able to withstand substantially more force than a piece of titanium 1 inch thick. There are instances of uru being damaged, and even completely destroyed. I'd have to look up the issues but, during Thor's last monthly series, his hammer was severely damaged. I can't remember all the specifics exactly. However, there was a character named Uroc, a pretty obscure character, who was a rock troll that used magic to transform his body into uru. In Thor #450, Uroc's left hand was exposed to liquid nitrogen and was completely shattered after being shot with a bullet. It wasn't an enchanted bullet or made of adamantium or some other ultra durable metal. It was just a plain old fashioned lead bullet. Is uru stronger than adamantium? I doubt it as there are numerous examples of it being severely damaged or even destroyed within mainstream Marvel continuity. However, if a legitimate Marvel publication can be found backing up the claim of uru's superior durability, in the mainstream Marvel Universe, then that's all there is to it. Otherwise, it's POV. Odin's Beard 00:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Don't Erase the Ultimate Wolverine Article you BITCHES!?

I am getting tired of whoever thie bum is that keeps on erasing my fucking article so stop Bitch!? User:Redbird 41 22:42, 08/12/06 (UTC)

If you'd bothered to read the talk page for your "fucking article," you'd see that there was consensus to merge it into the main Wolvie article. So no, it will not stop and any attempt to recreate without discussion will be reverted. CovenantD 06:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Haha, stupid. Since we're talking about Ultimate Wolverine, I have an issue to bring up: why the hell is everyone assuming that Hulk tearing him in half would damage his Adamantium skeleton? I thought this was Wikipedia. Come on guys, get with it. All references to this should be removed immediately. I'm too lazy and busy to be bothered, but I'd appreciate it if someone would, you know... get on that. -- Nick Begovich 22:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WOLVERINE ORIGIN

It states in the origin that is posted that Wolverine is the illegitamate child of Thomas Logan. That does not seem to be the case. In the Origin Series, the Howlett grandfather was seen with bone claws, and it is eluded to that the mother of James Howlett has suffered some sort of dimensia and has scars on her back that could be explained by the claws raking her back from her husband, the natural father of James Howlett —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.195.66.48 (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't remember the first - when exactly is the grandfather shown with claws? As for the second, it is implied - Logan speaks of Howlett as "not deserving a woman like that" or "not knowing how to treat a woman like that", or something similar - it is implied, but never stated, that they had a relationship in the past a few times. I gathered that the claws were from Thomas Logan or another child; the mother was obviously disgusted by mutants, and she would not have stayed married to one.
I guess the question is, are we allowed to mention events that are implied, but not explicitly confirmed, to have happened? Obviously we can't out-and-out say that they occured, but I do think it's permissible to mention things that are implied. -Switch t 18:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Things that are implied are fine to include as long as it's clearly stated that it's an implication. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The origin series did mention that his mother had another child who was not normal and that caused her to behave the way she did. That other child is unknown and that other child could be responsible for the scar she displayed. That other child was the first born. Now... we must admit that Thomas Logan looks a lot like our Logan! Thegrayone 21:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)thegrayone—]]12-14-06

Think about it. Thomas Logan's appearance was crafted to be virtually identical to Wolverine's but it is never stated that Thomas is Wolverine's biological father. Part of the Wolverine character's appeal is the mystery that surrounds him and his past. This was another of those little mysteries. It might be a general consensus that Thomas Logan was Wolverine's biological father, but Marvel decided to leave it as a mystery. We can assume he is, the resemblance is extremely difficult to get over, but, let's face it, unless Marvel confirms or denies it, we'll never really be able to know for complete certainty. As for the claw marks on Wolverine's mother, she did have a child that died prior to the events of the Origin mini-series named John Howlett. When Wolverine's mutant powers first emerge, after seeing Thomas Logan blow his father's head off with a shot gun, he uses his claws to kill Thomas. Wolverine's mother loses it and screams "No!! Not again!! Not James!!!" or something like that anyhow. So, that is an indication that Wolverine's older brother also possessed bone claws. You'll also notice that when Wolverine's grandfather first notices the claws, he's holding Wolverine's hand and examining them, doesn't seem at all surprised. Now, Wolverine's older brother features prominently in the Wolverine: The End mini-series. The mini-series reveals that he did develop powers like Wolverine's and that he was sent away to an asylum for several years. But, the only problem is that Wolverine: The End isn't part of the mainstream Marvel Universe. In the end, it's merely another alternate reality/timeline story. Odin's Beard 00:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/o/l/Talk%7EWolverine_%28comics%29_4bf0.html"