Talk:Kang the Conqueror

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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Immortus, Scarlet Centurion, and Iron Lad are all different entities. They may all be Kang from different parts of time, but its not the same as something like Victor Timely, an alias Kang once used. --DrBat 01:27, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Iron Lad and Immortus

Do Kang, Immortus and Iron Lad get separate entries, or just one? For that matter, should Scarlet Centurion and Rama-Tut re-direct to Kang, Immortus or Iron Lad... or should Scarlet Centurion get his own entry (as Kang's son, rather than just an alias of Kang's)?

Yes, and here's why.

Given Kang, Immortus and Iron Lad separate entries is like giving Marvel Girl, Phoenix and Jean Grey separate entities. All are names used by one character over that character's published career (not counting alternate futures or realities, and but that's another discussion).

As established, there is only one Kang left in the timeline (he absorbed or killed all others), Kang does become Immortus (seen in Avengers Forever) and Iron Lad is the younger version of Kang (this is confirmed in Young Avengers - Iron Lad clearly grows up to become the Avengers menace we all love to loath). Additionally, he spent several years as Rama-Tut, probably trying to be a "good guy" based on his Iron Lad period, before turning "evil" as Scarlet Centurion, then as Kang (now there's a story begging to be told!).

Now, I hear some people say, "they are separate characters," or point to the fact that they fight each other and would rather be considered as individual characters... well that's just because Kang is a time-traveler. Moving forward in time normally with the Avengers as we readers do (albeit at a faster pace than the Avengers), it can be hard for us to view this man as anything other than separate individuals, but the fact is, they are all the same person, and follow a direct linear path from his point of view. Just because we first meet an adult Kang, then a slightly younger Scarlet Centurion and much older Immortus and much younger Rama-Tut and years later a much younger Iron Lad, does not negate the fact that this is one person. Just because he had different identities and personalities at points in his apparently very long life, does not mean those names are "aliases" anymore than Nomad and The Captain are simply aliases of Captain America - those were clearly defined periods of the character's life.

Now, this might make for a long, convoluted Wikipedia entry.... but it's not like those don't already exist. I would suggest approaching the entry in two ways: first, summing up his publishing history in the order in which it was published (perhaps a paragraph describing his first appearance and summing up the first appearances of alternate versions in a few sentences), then as a full-blown "this is your life" type article, chronicling Kang's life from his perspective. Starting with Reed's father, then Iron Lad, then Rama-Tut and so forth.

Scarlet Centurion should be a separate article about Kang's son, with only a mention of Kang's time as the Centurion used in the main Kang article.

My two cents. - Kevingarcia 06:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Immortus, Scarlet Centurion, and Iron Lad are all different entities. They may all be Kang from different parts of time, but its not the same as something like Victor Timely, an alias Kang once used. And it'll get too complicated. Just leave it be. --DrBat 02:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Kang does not become Immortus. In Avengers Forever Immortus is show to be a divergent Kang; the Time Keepers attempt to force Kang to become Immortus, but Kang resists, resulting in a separate being, Immortus, being created. I think all of the other entities (Iron Lad, Rama-Tut, Scarlet Centurion (I)) should be merged. Kang's sons are separate characters and should remain separate.--StAkAr Karnak 11:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll grant you that, but from Immortus perspective, he was once Kang, before that he was Scarlet Centurion, before that Rama-Tut, before that Iron Lad. These were just aliases like Victor Timely, no, but they were phases in his life. Why not include them all in the Kang bio with short discriptive paragraphs and links to "main article on Iron Lad" or "main article on Rama-Tut"? Just my suggestion there. - Kevingarcia 05:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Being the founder of the Young Avengers, Iron Lad is important enough to keep his own article. --DrBat 01:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


They are all the same person so I they should be merged. jokauff 21:38 7 June, 2006 (UTC)

i strongly disagree to this move, i also think that scarlet centurian should be givern his own page. we crate a page for nathanian richards as a top page with brief introductions to each other his divergent personlities. with links to each of his divergent personalities. i understand that universe x is not marvel 616 cannon however perhaps we could use the explination of richards divergent personlaties in a theorys and academic littery theories on the charcter--Dr noire 22:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:A-129.jpg

Image:A-129.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)