Talk:Homo sapiens (Marvel Comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and provide comments here.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

All of the facts within this page as regards crossbreeding are verifiable from other Wikipedia articles; if crossbreeding is possible, which the examples cited prove, then the races must necessarily all be part of the same species.

The links shown will take people to pages where the facts can be verified.

Maybe the right thing to do then is to prune down the individual sections a little, and add main article links at the top of each with Template:Main. I think it's useful to have a overview page for this, but it's currently a bit long for being a summary. Electrolite 00:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Skrulls

The bit about Skrull evolution doesn't belong in this article. I'm removing it, but I'll add a Trivia notice at the end. Noclevername 06:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

All the contents of this article will be deleted shortly if reliable sources are not provided backing them up. Even if the claims here are true, they otherwise violate WP:NOR by being an original synthesis of information and a novel drawing of conclusions. Moreover, I see no reason to believe that the Marvel Universe consistently adheres to the same definition of species as mainstream biology; there are countless examples of pseudoscience and quasi-science in Marvel Comics, particularly when Marvel deals with biology, genetics, evolution, etc. Moreover, this article even flatly contradicts Marvel Comics in certain respects, without any indication of doing so or any referenced justification for doing so: it chooses to rename Homo mermanus (a species) to Homo sapiens mermanus based on its own personal views on what should or shouldn't be (as opposed to what is or isn't) a species. This is clearly inappropriate for Wikipedia to do, and the fact that this article is doing so casts a lot of doubt on the validity of the rest of this article's claims.

Moreover, this article itself fundamentally misunderstands the meaning of species: it is perfectly possible for individuals of different species to produce an offspring, as long as those two species are closely-related. Mules, for example, are the offspring of two different species, horses and donkeys; if we went by this article's standards, we'd have to reclassify horses and donkeys as being the same species. Likewise, lions and tigers can breed to produce ligers and tigons, oxen and buffalo can produce beefalo, and bottlenose dolphins and false killer whales can produce wolphins. A better criterion than whether two individuals can reproduce together is whether their offspring will be fertile, as the overwhelming majority of interspecies hybrids are infertile. However, there are a few exceptions even to this; the topic of what is or isn't a separate species is in many cases very debatable (for example, until about 15 years ago dogs and wolves were thought to be a separate species, but now they are considered the same species), thus making it especially unsuitable for original research attempting to theorize about what does or doesn't constitute a species in a fictional universe! -Silence 22:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

This whole article is really problematic for all the above reasons and some of the ones above. Without a really solid source which lays all this species/sub-species human family tree then it has to be considered original research. These concerns have been here unaddressed since the start of the year and that is a bad sign. (Emperor 21:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Uh, made up?

Are most of those scientific names even used by Marvel in any of their products - inhumanus, aeternus, deviare ... they're very nice sounding but I've never heard them described as anything of the sort. The only ones where I've heard Marvel employ the format of scientific naming is with human/mutant/atlantean.211.30.52.177 09:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Homo Magi

This belongs in DC article and even States it unless this article is retitled to include dc types it has to be removed [edit] Homo magi DC also suggests that some humans have inherent ability to utilize magic, and these humans are part of a branch or offshoot of humanity referred to as the "Homo Magi", who have interbred with normal humans. As with aliens and mutants with superhuman powers, homo magi are also often classed together as Metas by the general public of the DCU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.67.133.7 (talk) 00:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)