Talk:Captain Britain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] CB as Leader of Excalibur

I do not believe CB was ever the formal leader of Excalibur. (Nightcrawler, as the most experienced and level-headed team member, usually held that role.) If such a fact is edited back in, please add a citation to a specific issue.

-It is mentioned in Excalibur 124 (perhaps before) on the inside of the front cover that Captain Britain was the former leader of Excalibur before losing his powers Rorykillhorn (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Learning the ropes

Captain Britain had a lot of stories before meeting Spider-Man. It is misleading to say that he "learned the ropes" with Spidey as they only met for a couple of days at most. Also, he does not qualify as an alcoholic, recovering or otherwise - he has rarely been shown to drink, as a matter of fact. I guess too many people had their fist impression from the "Excalibur: The Sword is Drawn" GN.

Re: ""learned the ropes" with Spidey" - see Excalibur #53 (or thereabouts - I think that's right). It's a retcon, but it's accurate SoM 20:38, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If the UncannyXMen.Net profile [1] is any indication, the retcon really does not amount to that much. Luis Dantas 06:28, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Font

why is the font of the article different from the font of the rest of wikipedia (and the beginning of the article)? or is it just me?Zombieliving 22:43, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Biography

I've added images but need to check back on my early CB issues and reread the Moore/Davis CB issues before tackling that. What would be helpful is a list of American Marvel comics CB has been in, i don't know enough to do that any justice. Logan1138 15:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Excalibur v2

AFAIK, Captain Britain didn't appear in Excalibur v2, which was the same as "House of M: Prelude - Excalibur". I'll remove them if there are no objections? J•A•K 03:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

That was Excalibur v3. v2 was a four-issue CB-centric mini (but you're right about CB having nothing to do with the Genosha series). - SoM 11:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I realised shortly after that it was v3. But it was put down as v2 on the page.J•A•K 12:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Immune to Psylocke's powers?

Brian is also the twin of Betsy Braddock - because of this they are immune to each others powers and the two share a strong psychic bond.

Since when? How can you be immune to superhuman strength? Excalibur #55 starts with Brian and Betsy fighting, and it's made clear that his invulnerability stops her from hurting him, but she can read his mind and therefore predict his movements. It finishes with him threatening to crush her skull, and her threatening to stick her psionic knife in his head. Hardly immunity to one another.

In Uncanny X-Men #462-#465 (House of M story line), Clarement makes note of the fact that the powers of Brian and Betsy and negated due to their genetic kinship. That's the most recent reference to this issue. But, I don't know...things change all the time.

Bhissong 05:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)bhissong

[edit] Size of CB article

Does anyone else feel that this article is way too big? After all, these character entries are meant to give stream-lined descriptions, not act as a substitute for reading an entire series of comics.

Bhissong 20:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)bhissong

O.k., well, no one has voiced their opinion on the issue of this article's size. Unless there are objections, I'd like to shorten it and change language to the present tense (as stipulated by Wikipedia rules of articles on fictional characters.) Bhissong 15:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)bhissong

Is anyone up to the task of seriously cleaning up the "King of Otherworld" section? Right now, I know very little about it. Bhissong 18:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)bhissong

[edit] Captain Britain Weekly'?

I've just glanced at my copy of Captain Britain #1, and I'm not sure if the "weekly" is actually part of the title. The cover simply calls it "Captain Britain", as does the Stan Lee intro piece and one of the interior ads - and the indicia don't mention a title at all (Although, amusingly, it does confirm that Neil Tennant was the editor - he gets a thank-you from Stan, too.. :)

Do we have any confirmation that it is Captain Britain Weekly, not Captain Britain'? If not, should we change references to that title to match the comic itself? --Mrph 20:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-Britain Merge

There may be some value in this. Let's see some further discussion. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 23:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This has come up before but it kind of rain out of steam. It does need doing because a lot of them (most?) are failing WP:FICT. I would suggest that the best idea would be to merge to Captain Britain Corps. We could then break up the table format and do it in prose form (which I prefer unless the data lends itself specifically to that). Sound like a plan? (Emperor (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
Although notabilty clearly is an issue, I am primarily nominating for content, cohesion and accessibility. - 66.109.248.114 (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC).
2¢...
For the most part, I like Emperor's suggestion. Almost all of the variations fall under the Captain Britain Corps umbrella and not all of them are a variation of Braddock.
But there are 3 I wouldn't move: The primary Cap of course, though he should get a mention on the Corps page. The second being Albion. I don't see the need to split that particular article up, and again, the Corps related version can be mentioned and lined to the list article. The last is the alt versions on this page... I'm honestly not sure they should be moved. I can see a fan logic that 1) they are Captain Britons and 2) that Marvel has laid out that all Captain Britons are part of the Corps. But... there is nil to hang that on with in the stories that the 3 characters appear in nor in secondary sources. - J Greb (talk) 03:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Keep it to the Captain Britain Corps merges as they are the entries that are too thin with little hope of great expansion. It will also result in a solid and coherent entry. Trying to fit all the alternative versions of Braddock in with the CBC might result in a less focused entry (when it isn't necessary). If we bring all the Captain Britain Corps together and it looks like merging this with alternate versions of Braddock then we can give that a shot but I think that is a different issue and a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. So yes to CBC, no to alternate forms of Braddock and Albion (for now). (Emperor (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
I agree with the merging as long as we don't use those crazy unreadable tables. PARAGRAPHS. Please. For the love of all things decent. Lots42 (talk) 04:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The many Brits merged to the Corps is fine, do you think a summary should be incorported to the Other versions section (outside of the fict character bio) on the Braddock page? -66.109.248.114 (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC).
Honestly? No.
IIUC, Albion and the three AVs already mentioned here are direct analogues to Braddock, the rest of the Corps aren't. Even with the conceptual element that they are multiversal, to me it's akin to listing the GLC members as "alternate versions" of Alan Scott or Hal Jordan — a non-starter. - J Greb (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I would cite Tangent Supermen and or Stan Lee's ... multiversal versions of Captain Britain, regardles of the identity behind the mask is an other version. A league of alternate reality versions of a characters, is comprised still of altnernate reality version of that character. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 00:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC).
OK the merge tags have been removed - I'd suggest renominating most (but not all) of them for merging with Captain Britain Corps, as discussed above. Any thoughts before I get the ball rolling? (Emperor (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC))
Actually... I'd suggest either re upping the tags as all were downed w/o explanation, or closing and doing the merge as laid out here. I'd lean on the first though with a note to the single editor who removed the tags. - J Greb (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Funny, while you guys were responding here, I was in the process of removing the tags to pose the question about the Corps. Currently, I updated the alternate version section, but was looking for direction on all the alt versions. Previously, User:Emperor suggested that not all Cap Brits be merged to the Corps, but a refocus of a majority be merged to the Corps. I was in the process of posing a new merge discussion exclusively for the remainder of the Caps and the Corps, to hache out who does and does not belong. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 18:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC).
Good work. We'll continue this over on Captain Britain Corps. (Emperor (talk) 19:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC))