Talk:Thanos

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. See comments.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thanos article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Powers and Abilities

User 72.192.204.181, you keep adding in that whole "Hulk avoidance" bit as if it was something of real importance. It isn't. It add nothing to the article as a whole since that section already mentions that Thanos prefers to outwit opponents. To that end, I'm removing it yet again. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 13 march 2006

[edit] Thanos's immortality

Should Thanos still be considered immortal due to rejection by Death after the events of Avengers: Celestial Quest #8 and thanos #7 where Death made peace with Thanos and was willing to accept him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.208.201.223 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 27 March 2006

Kyo-1 For Now (Annihilation Timeline), Thanos is not Inmortal. He explains it in Thanos Quest 1 to Runner [We are not inmortals, Simply, we make old too slow...]. Biff Loman 19:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Technically, the exact quote was "You elders aren't quite as immortal as you imagined. Greatly decelerated aging, nothing more.Still mortal. Although you could remain like this for ,oh another five billiong years". So he was talking about the Elders only not sure if it applies to him as well. --Aarontay 17:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The Death made the peace with him in the last number of "The End" and she return his 'favor' and 'friendship' [XD] to him.

Technically, I guess a character would have to be totally beyond death by any means to qualify as immortal. As an Eternal, however, he's still at least ageless. Biff Loman 19:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

It's the other way around. Immortal means unable to die of old age (As a mortal would), where as Eternal would mean just that; they will live for eternity. 66.167.147.162 12:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Um... Think that in this way: If the Lady Death don't "Kiss" at Thanos (cause he don't have her "favor"), he can't Die, right ?. So you have 2 evidences than Thanos can die: if the Thano's Clones (Infinity Abbys historyline) can die, the original Thanos can die too and the other is than you can see Thanos dies in "Infinity Crusade" when The Godess finish her "Ecstasy ?". ;P
I must be having an off day or something, because that didn't make any sense to me whatsoever.  :-) 70.53.108.62 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Kyo-1 12:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Sorry for the misspelling of my last post. ^^U. I'm saying this: Thanos can die cause he don't be beyond Death. If Thanos was beyond the Death, He don't died when Warlock' soul turn him into stone. After that, Lady Death resurected him to help her to kill the half population of the universe (I.G. Saga). ^^U

[edit] POV

the use of the term Rip off in the begining seems a little harsh

i see someone edited the term out. Squanderdalfast 00:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Is the name suppose to mean death or immortality? In Greek "death" = "thanatos" while immortality = "athanatos". The greek name Athanasios/Athanasius (short version of Athanasios = "THANOS"), means he who is immortal, is therefore a short version of a name which actually means immortal. I know this coz Thanos is my name.

Guess your mum didn't like you, lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

Since his name isn't Athanos and he's not meant to have a Greek name (To the reader he has an alien name), I'd assume it's meant to mean death. 66.167.147.162 12:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strength Level

Hulk, Thor, Gladiator, Hercules and the Silver Surfer are all considered to have Class 100 strength. Listing Thanos at incalculable strength levels indicates his strength is beyond their level, nothing more. Class 100 can no longer indicate a tonnage the character can lift, if it did Class 75 Namor (who has military pressed nuclear submarines weighing tens of thousands of tons) would also be listed at incaluculable, yet he is clearly below the Hulk and Thor in strength as shown in direct interactions. If tonnage really determined the strength class characters fell into then everyone from Namor, the Thing, Sasquatch, Colossus, etc. would have to be listed at "Incalculable"; which would make the whole class system pretty moot. Even Spiderman would have to be Class 50+ since he has lifted close to 50 tons in the past, but he is still only a Class 10 character. The strength "class" system can only be a system of relative strengths, meaning Class 100 guys are all in the same relative ball park, Class 50 guys are all in the same ballpark and guys listed as Incalculable are solidly above those considered to be Class 100. The Incalculable strength level of Thanos, as well as Mangog or Kurse, obviously cannot begin to compare to the Incalculable strength level of omnipotent types such as Galactus or the Celestials. The implication here is that the "Incalculable" strength rating in the class system simply means "beyond Class 100" and isn't a true, definable class in and of itself. Thanos currently being solidly above guys like Hulk, Thor, and the Surfer (as shown in direct interactions) in raw strength means he deserves the "Incalculable" or "beyond Class 100" strength rating. - MrBigB

That's not only totally wrong, but you need an editor. 70.50.53.109 13:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
What a witty, well thought out and informative rebuttal. Let me guess, a Hulk fan? There are examples of Thanos simultaneously overpowering not only Thor & Thing (pre-death, before power-up), but also Hulk & Dumb-Drax (post-death powerup; IG) Hulk & Hercules (post-death powerup; issue involving Quasar) and the Silver Surfer on numerous occasions. Thanos is beyond the Class 100 bricks in pure strength, too many in-continuity examples point to this to continue to deny it. - MrBigB
I can't believe I didn't notice this reply before now. Thanks for a laugh, B. Not a good one, but a laugh. You might want to avoid saying things like "Dumb-Drax" if you're going to accuse others of lacking wit. Just a suggestion. Biff Loman 21:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Biff loman9, are you even aware that there are two (possibly three) distinctly different versions of Drax the Destroyer? We have the original Drax (who retained his full intelligence) and "Dumb" Drax who was resurrected by Kronos about the same time Death resurrected Thanos. The resurrected "Dumb" Drax had his powers (and strength) greatly enhanced but he had the intelligence equivilant to that of a 3 year old child. "Dumb" Drax had Class 100 strength while the original Drax did not. Perhaps now you understand why I referred specifically to "Dumb Drax" when referring to the Thanos feat. It's a commonly used term when referring to the resurrected, powered up Drax. As for the laugh, you're welcome. Somehow, I doubt it will seem quite as funny now.  :) MrBigB
It's even funnier now - because you think you're actually capable of correcting someone else! Too funny! As a long time comics reader (probably longer than you've been alive, as you're probably about 12), I know the histories of most Marvel characters. (I'm not much of a DC fan.) I'm not sure if I can really explain to you exactly what was funny about what you said, considering your reply totally missed the point! Again! Oh, it's almost too rich! Almost. 67.71.143.54 12:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, it IS even funnier now! Let me guess, you think "dumb" only refers to people who are mute? Check again, Mr. articulate! MrBigB 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
As far as that goes, I think I remember in Secret Wars the Hulk was shown on the cover lifting a whole mountain. You can't take the listed, Marvel Handbook entries too seriously. Writers and artists probably don't want to be constrained by them. I remember an issue of Thor where Eric Masterson is shown holding Thor's apparently lifeless body in his arms; Thor, who supposedly weighs 640 lbs! I think when it comes to the strength levels of these superheavyweights, the best that you can really do is say that they're all around the same level, and it's impossible to tell who really is stronger. Biff Loman 17:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
The Handbooks can be used as a reference for relative strengths, nothing more. - MrBigB Clarification on this one, the Handbook strength ratings can be used as a relative scale. 70.159.58.34 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Why do you feel that one exception is acceptable? CovenantD 13:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
What exception? Please clarify. Thanos has not only proven to be stronger than Class 100 characters one-on-one on too many occasions to mention, he has been depicted physically overpowering TWO Class 100 characters simultaneously on several occasions. If that doesn't show him exceeding the Class 100 category I don't know what does. There is a reason why Marvel has both Class 100 and Incalculable ratings, to signify when a character significantly exceeds those that are accepted Class 100 characters. The ONLY thing that throws a wrench into Class system is the laughable ranking based on the 100-ton scale. As I mentioned Class 75 Namor has pressed nuclear submarines with little effort, Thor lifted the midgard serpent, Hulk swam with an island on his back and braced the mountain in secret wars, Gladiator has moved planets and hoisted the Baxter Building, Class 80 Sasquatch hoisted a 250 ton airplane (stated in comic) then threw it against the thrust of its own engines and the list goes on and on. The tonnage system sucks, but using the strength "Classes" as a system of relative strength still works and doesn't fly in the face of continuity. MrBigB
Most writers probably don't give a rat's hairy little ass about Handbook entries. A character is a strong or as fast as they need to be for the demands of a particular story. Biff Loman 18:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
They probably don't. And it isn't the Handbooks job to establish continuity but rather make sense of it. If Character X is shown as significantly stronger than Character Y in direct interaction then the Handbook should reflect that. Writers should be able to use the Handbooks as a basic reference for relative power or strength levels. MrBigB
The Handbooks were published for gullible fans by a greedy comic book company. All we need to know is that these characters are superhumanly strong; who is stronger is up to the writer and the needs of the story. Biff Loman 19:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
So what you are saying is that established continuity is totally irrelevant. A writer decides to have SpiderMan physically overpower an enraged Savage Hulk to "fit the needs of the story" and that's fine. How about some ignorant writer decides to have Captain America lift an M1 Abrams because "it fits the needs of the story". We know these characters can't perform these feats under normal circumstances because of one reason, CONTINUITY. The Handbooks simply attempted to make sense of established continuity; in many ways they failed yet in many ways they also succeeded. MrBigB
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Biff Loman 21:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
That's what it looks like. Based on what you have written here it seems to me like you are saying that all characters with superhuman strength should be able to do anything the writer feels is necessary for the story. There IS a semi-defined hierarchy in the MU whether you acknowledge it or not. For example Spiderman should not be able to beat Thor in an armwrestling match, the Handbooks help to clarify things like this. Both characters have super strength so are readers supposed to suspend disbelief when some uninformed writer comes along and tries to tell him Spiderman is stronger than Thor under "normal circumstances" just because it "fits the needs of the story?" Hell no. So just what are you saying? - MrBigB
  • What, still no response for this one Biff? I'm not surprised.  :) MrBigB 22:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Everyone else has abandoned this, BigB. They probably feel sorry for you. 67.71.141.180 14:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Weak (and I mean WEAK, weak, WEAK, weak) cop-out. Unless you can come up with a relevant rebuttal to anything (ANYTHING) I have said this is my final reply to you on this topic. Good day. MrBigB 22:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Point out a comic book (not the Handbook - a real, in-continuity comic) that uses the Class 100 system in regard to the characters you mention. CovenantD 22:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

CovenantD, I have pointed out several in-contintuity comics that have showcased Thanos demonstrating physical superiority over top tier characters, sometimes two at the same time. In the last revision to the article I even omitted the "Class 100" reference to take the focus off of the Handbooks. (even though I did not contribute the Class 100 mention to the Thanos article to begin with) This is to say nothing of his battles with Tyrant and Odin, both of whom have shown dramatic physical superiority to characters like the Surfer, Thor, Hercules and Gladiator. Still we see in-continuity examples of Thanos going to-to-toe with both of them and holding his own. A picture of Thanos engaging Tyrant hand-to-hand can be seen on the article main page, this is a feat shown to be beyond the strength capabilities of Gladiator, Beta Ray Bill, the Surfer, and Morg (all Class 100) IN-CONTINUITY.
Here is what I stated above: "There are examples of Thanos simultaneously overpowering not only Thor & Thing (pre-death, before power-up), but also Hulk & Dumb(resurrected)-Drax (post-death powerup; IG) Hulk & Hercules (post-death powerup; issue involving Quasar) and the Silver Surfer on numerous occasions. Thanos is beyond the Class 100 bricks in pure strength, too many in-continuity examples point to this to continue to deny it." What more do you want? MrBigB

The Big problem is that you are trying to portray Thanos as stronger than all but the most cosmic and aesoteric characters. You'll not get a lot of support for that when we all know that it depends on the story, the writer and the editor - if they need a story where Spider-Man punches out Thanos, you can be assured that it will happen. Trying to say that he's stronger than everyone just isn't going to fly. CovenantD 23:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I am not trying to portray Thanos in any way, I am only reporting what has been shown in the comics. If a writer needs a story where Spiderman punches out Thanos they will create the unique circumstances that will allow such a feat...or else Jim Starlin will be along to ret-con it away (as he did with the Thor and KaZar incidents). I do not even consider myself a Thanos fan but several of the users here, yourself included, are flat out REFUSING to accept proven character traits and are HARMING the Thanos article as a result. Your constant removal of these FACTS because you don't personally agree with them (or dislike me), with NO evidence to support the removal, IS vandalism. MrBigB
You just don't get it, do you Mr.Big? Biff Loman 01:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Another one of those wonderful replies. Apparently I don't get something, perhaps you should express your point in a more articulate manner. Be prepared for feedback. MrBigB
Firstly, you are in no position to accuse anyone of not expressing themself articulately. Looking at your posts, you obviously have an extremely poor understanding of the rules of grammar and punctuation. Never mind that you also, again obviously, lack the power of reason which most of the rest of the population of the world takes for granted. You might want to consider that you're the only one who doesn't understand. I don't see why I should waste more time on you when the chance that you will understand is so slim. You're just too stupid. Unfortunately, the hand you were dealt was not a kind one.
Sure I am, you have provided nothing but insults on this thread. You have offered NOTHING (sorry, nothing) to refute ANYTHING (ANYTHING) I have said. You clearly lack the knowledge to engage me on this topic so you stick you insults and obscure comments. This is a common tactic for the willingly ignorant. MrBigB 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

67.71.142.157 11:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

As an example of your missing the point completely, see your above comments. You italicized all caps! From where I'm standing, you are the only one who has failed to construct a logical, reasoned argument. Other have refused to restate theirs because what they said was already perfectly clear in the original. On more than one occasion you have been invited to re-examine those comments, but have refused to do so. For someone who claims not to be a Thanos fan, you've spent an awful lot of time on this "discussion." 67.71.141.180 15:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Apparently you are not bright enough to grasp the reason WHY I italicized all caps. Do I need to spell it out for you Mr. Articulate? It was a slight againt YOU! Also, one should learn how to spelled "italicized" (not italized) before slamming others on grammar. Have a great day, Biff. 70.159.58.34 20:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the word "typo" is not in your vocabulary. The only one I see here making personal attacks is you. I know what you were trying to do in the above, italicizing your all caps, but obviously you failed. Let's see if you can figure out why. 67.71.141.27 20:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Btw, Big, I already stated my case quite clearly at the beginning, but you've yet to read (or at least understand it). I'm not the only one, either. You ignored and insulted another user as well. I have no need to restate my argument, and have just been enjoying your wonderful replies. You are certainly entertaining. This has gone on long enough, but feel free to keep writing if you want. 67.71.141.27 20:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
You stated your case at the beginning but the presentation (and logic behind it) was weak and subsequently debunked. 70.159.58.34 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It's customary, Big, to use italics rather than capitalization for emphasis. 67.71.140.140 02:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

 :rolls eyes: MrBigB
What, the rules don't apply to Mr (laughs) Big? Here's the thing: If you want people to even consider taking you seriously, you might want to come across as a guy who at least has some familiarity with the rules of the English language. Just a suggestion. If you don't want to do that, you're going to have to get used to being a joke for the rest of your life. I think that you're probably already used to that. How many wedgies did you get in high school? How many times were you stuffed into your locker? (Or are you even old enough to have been to high school? Probably you're not.) The name "MrBig" says it all. 67.71.142.157 11:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
LMAO! So you are analyzing me based on the handle "MrBigB"? "MrBigB" is quite a bit different than "MrBig" BTW, don't know if you are sharp enough to catch that. MrBigB 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I'm having an off day myself, but it seems to me you're being evaluated based mainly on your comments made here, which don't make you look too good - or very sharp, that's for sure. I can say one thing positive about you, at least; you are certainly entertaining. I notice you didn't answer the questions... 67.71.141.180 14:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Once again, nothing but personal insults. Nice, Biff, nice, you are truly an invaluable asset to Wikipedia. 70.159.58.34 20:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Good Lord this was a huge conversation! LOL TheBalance 02:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Huge, but pointless. Big just isn't in the same weight class as the rest of us. He couldn't hold up his end. 67.71.142.157 11:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
* LOL! (rolls eyes) The sad thing is - you probably think this is true. MrBigB 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it's obvious - Big is a little boy lost in a game of men. Or something. He's out of his depth, anyway. I mean, it's not like a real man would...well, never mind. Big's a loser. 'Nuff said! Todd Bridges 12:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Since Namor's strength was brought up, I'd just like to point out that his Wikipedia entry says his strength is listed as Class 100 as of 2004, and looking at the panel where he lifts the oil tanker (http://img333.imageshack.us/img333/2802/namorfeat220rx.gif), it's in water, which would significantly reduce its weight. As for other characters, my Handbook knowledge only goes back as far as the Master Edition of the 90s. Thor and the Hulk had their strength listed as Incalculable, which was defined as in excess of 100 tons. They don't say how far in excess. I haven't read the issues where Thanos went toe-to-toe with some of the heroes mentioned, but I wouldn't be surprised if he used some of his other powers. I can't say if he did or not. Todd Bridges 19:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  • That is not the instance I am referring to. I will try to find the image I am speaking of, in it he presses a submarine above his head while out of water; though he himself was wet at the time he was not immersed. As for Thanos' strength in relation to the heroes I mentioned - Thanos uses nothing but pure strength, no charged fists, no eye beams, no sneak attacks, nothing of the sort. Thanos performed the Moe Howard routine on Hercules and Professor Hulk (is Prof. Hulk funny too, Biff?) as well as on Thor and Thing and he easily backhanded Prof. Hulk and DUMB-Drax away from him during the Infinity Gauntlet ordeal. MrBigB 21:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I just can't watch this. MrBigB is the only one still contributing to this, and is having a conversation with himself. It's too painful to watch. The guy just doesn't realize how many times he's missed the point completely. One thing that's odd, too, is that he wastes so long to reply, hoping that the people he's replying to will be gone by then - and his puny intellect won't be challenged again. I feel bad just having wasted this much time here - imagine being MrBigB! 67.71.141.180 14:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
You continue to say I am the only one responding, yet here is another response from you on June 30, 2006 at 14:59. You claim that I am missing the point? LMAO! 70.159.58.34 20:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
You certainly seem to enjoy laughing your ass off. 67.71.141.27 20:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I must admit you provide me with a modicum of entertainment. 70.159.58.34 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Why did you take on so many different socks in your attempt to debate me? You commented on your own comments on this page. The Todd Bridges and Biff Loman pages gave me some rather interesting insights about you. Interesting reading to say the least. MrBigB 20:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

This whole disscusion is pointless, since using stats from the Handbook is a copyright violation and should be removed. T-1000 00:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Good lord, you can smell the testosterone in here! Perhaps if you'd care to stop insulting Mr Big you would be so kind as to take some of his comments into consideration and provide intelligent responses to them instead of just saying he's wrong. So far he has come up with perfectly logical arguments in favour of his theory whilst you people have failed to do anything but slate his opinions and discredit him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

Just because Thanos can punch somebody and hurt them doesn't mean he's stronger. Unless Thanos did the old WWF, palm-to-palm, fingers locked thing, or out arm-wrestled these characters, it doesn't mean anything. For instance, Spider-Man routinely beats up on people who are far beyond him in terms of pure strength. 66.167.147.162 14:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rob bank

Can anyone tell me in what issue of Spiderman, Thanos is shown robbing a bank

> I don't know anything about that, but in "Spidey Super Stories" #39, Thanos is on the hunt for the Cosmic cube and uses a Thanos-copter to track it down. He battles Spidey and the Cat (Hellcat), and is defeated and taken away by the police. Its hilarious. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 18 June 2006

[edit] Insanity

I remember an issue where Thanos tapped into his "power cosmic" in an effort to confront the child of huimself and Death. Tapping this energy costs him his sanity (invokes mania, I believe). But I found no other mention of it in anything else. Was it mentioned anywhere else? Is it considered canon? AlGorup 16:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

That took place in the "Celestial Quest" mini-series. Yes, the series is considered canon AFAIK, however, the version of Thanos that appeared therin was later stated to be a Thanosi clone. A clone evidently capable of fooling Mentor, Eros, Death and Eternity himself into believing it to be the real deal. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 18 June 2006
And Thanos was never all there to begin with.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

[edit] Mistakes and Errors

Kyo-1 Thanos can't (and never do) destroy the Heart of the Universe... if he could do it, The Livin Tribunal, Eternity and All Marvel Universe dies. Remember than the Heart is one of the two items than exceeds the Livin Tribunal's Power and they Sentences [The Inifinity Gaunlet is the other item than exceeds the Livin Tribunal's Power cause the Gaunlet is the Physic form Of The One].

There is no evidence that suggests that the IGs power exceeds the power of the LT. - MrBigB
Technically, you're right, cause no one said that... but it's very obvious than the Infinity Gaunlet's Power is Supreme even to take care of the Living Tribunal's Sentences and Demands. In "The END" (5th Issue) Thanos said: 'The IG gave me total control of Space, Time, Power, Reallity, Mind and Souls, but it was a EXTERNAL control'... if Thanos controls all facts of the Reallity with a infinity power (Reallity Gem + Power Gem), he can control the Sentences of LT. Kyo-1
And yet it is the Living Tribunal's ruling that prevents the Infinity Gems from working in unison. There was also the incident of the Living Tribunal overriding Adam Warlock (with the IG) at the cosmic assembly. At the very least the LT is equal to the IG, and there are indications that point to the LT being greater than the IG. MrBigB 20:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
That's right.But i think than that Sentence ('suggested' by Eternity in the last issue of Infinity War) can be 'overwriten': In "Thanos - Epiphany", Galactus creates a artefact than does the Gems works together... or, aparently, can works together... ^^U.
I don't think so. In the Thanos series Galactus created the "crux" so he could siphon off the power of the Infinity Gems. Even though Galactus' data records were manipulated by "Hunger" to mask the crux's true purpose; I think it's pretty safe to assume if the Gems could work in unison (as they did for Thanos and Adam) Galactus could have simply united them and used them to sate his hunger. If they could indeed work in unison why create a device to combine their power at all? I think it's pretty clear the LT's ruling is still in effect. Even in the Infinity War, the LT had to temporarily overturn his ruling (thanks to the Galactus/Eternity appeal) to allow them Gems (even with a fake Reality Gem) to work together. MrBigB 14:37, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're right, but in the 4th Issue of the serie, Thanos speaks with himself when he is stunding the Galactus's files and said: "he could remove his hungry only wishing it". ^^U.


Comment The Heart of the Universe is little more than an artifact that allows one to become one with the Universe in every meaning of the word -and to control it. He who becomes one with the Heart of the Universe (synchronizes with the Universe's "frequency," as it were) is more powerful than EVERYTHING else in the Marvel Universe, including the Infinity Gauntlet and that Universe's version of the Living Tribunal (who is itself more powerful than the Infinity Gauntlet, as was amply demonstrated in Issue #1 of "Adam Warlock and the Infinity Watch." )

The Gauntlet is NOT as powerful as the Heart of the Universe. (If it were, than the Cosmic Powers of the Universe would have presumably simply asked the Living Tribunal to allow the Gems to work in unison once more, give it to a champion amongst their own, and attacked Thanos as an equal).

Thanos777 20:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


Kyo-1 23:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC) comment I'm agree with you in your first point: The Heart of the Universe is supreme... but in your second point i'm disagree: If Thanos (and Nebula too) beats Eternity and make Mistress Death a 'slave' of the wearer with the I.G. is cause the G.I. does at his wearer more powerful than Eternity and Mistress Death. The only thing comparable to this is the L.T. ... so is reasonable think about the I.G. have (at least) the same power of L.T. . So, if Thanos said that about Galactus and his hunger in "Epiphany" is for something, i think.

Well, the Gauntlet is not quite as powerful as that....

In the first issue of "Warlock and the Infinity Gauntlet," the Living Tribunal reverses Adam Warlock, who with a wave of his hand and the power of the Infinity Gauntlet dismissed all of the rest of the Cosmic Powers of the Universe (including Eternity) with a thought.

The Tribunal didn't even figuratively bat an eyelash when he told Adam Warlock, "I represent forces that dwarf even your might."

The overall power pyramid of the Marvel Universe, from higher to lower:

  • The original God (who killed itself and whose "corpse" became the Infinity Gauntlet)
  • Anyone who synchronizes with the Heart of the Universe, becoming part of everything and therefore, possibly, equal or nearly equal to the original Creator of the Marvel Megaverse
  • The Living Tribunal, created by the original God to keep all Marvel Universes in cosmic balance
  • The Wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet
  • The Cosmic Powers of the Marvel Universe, "led" by Eternity and Death
  • The Phoenix Force, at maximum strength
  • Galactus, actually a living star and capable of the entire output of such in his true form (yes, one could possibly include Aegis and Tenebrous in this category as well)
  • The Celestials
  • Cosmic Cubes
  • The wielder of the Odinforce (possibly a match for a Cosmic Cube in terms of reality-warping powers)

Just a general guideline, folks..... Thanos777 05:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Tons of speculation here. The Infinity Being, or Nemesis, is not the One Above All and there is no evidence to suggest that it exceeded the Living Tribunal OR the Heart of the Universe. Also, Galactus is a living star? There is nothing to suggest that what-so-ever. His "corpse" took the form of a star, but he himself is anything but. In fact, Galactus has also been referred to as a metamorphasized cosmos which makes sense considering his origin. There has also been evidence to suggest that a fully sated Galactus is indeed an equal to Eternity. In fact, Eternity himself once stated such. TheManofSteel 18:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


Kyo-1 21:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)And after that, the L.T. Said to Warlock when he rejects Eternit's demand on first time "i do. Let it be known That i rule against you", yes, i know that. But Warlock is not afraid of the L.T. when Eternity is waiting for know the "wisdom of his judment"... So, Warlock is "accused" of be the new wearer of the I.G. cause he is unworthy of wear the I.G. and he is not like Thanos: Thanos = Strongest survive [natural Law], Warlock = become a new cosmic entity on the M.U. [Unnatural Law]... um... i'm thinking about this right now and maybe both are right: The I.G. gives at his/her owner the "Omni" rank, right ? MAYBE, the Gauntle itself (not Nemesis) give more power depending of his/her wearer. can be ?. I always think about "Omni Thanos vs L.T." and i figured who is the (obvious) Winner...

And Is Nemesis strongest that the L.T. ??

In other point, i don't agree with this:

  • The Phoenix Force, at maximum strength
  • Galactus, actually a living star and capable of the entire output of such in his true form (yes, one could possibly include Aegis and Tenebrous in this category as well)

I think you're wrong cause Galactus is the 3rd force in the Universe and he is the balancer between Eternity and Death. But i must say that i don't know ANYTHING about Phoenix//Dark Phoenix Force and i don't know how powerful Dark Phoenix Force is ^^U. (If you want, we can open a new "threat" about this. ^^U)

You're mis-understanding, and mixing up, two different, unrelated things: The various beings' power levels, and their function in the Universe.

While Galactus is far weaker than the maximum potential of the Phoenix (and at maximum, the Phoenix Force can probably rival or even exceed most of the Great Powers of the Marvel Universe), she is nevertheless less "important" than Galactus because Galactus represents an abstract idea -namely, the balance between Life and Death.

Killing off Phoenix will result in the possible loss of the Phoenix Force from the Marvel Universe; but killing off Galactus will "negate" the meaning of both Life and Death, and the Universe will quickly fall (actually, they say that Galactus' presence in this universe stops a super-cosmic being called Abraxas from devouring the entire Universe, but that's a recent development).

But as far as raw power levels go, Galactus is FAR below his "siblings" Eternity and Death, even though he serves as their 'equal' in the Cosmic Pantheon. (Depending on the location in the Universe, Galactus is even weaker than his counterpart......the In-Betweener.)Thanos777 04:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Galactus weaker than the In-Betweener? Interesting, as Galactus who just nearly died and was hungry stalemated the In-Betweener who was in possession of one of the Infinity Gems. There is also no evidence to suggest that Order and Chaos are more powerful than Galactus, Andy Schmidt has even stated this. TheManofSteel 18:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S: On a side note, Kyo, Adam Warlock wasn't judgd unfit to keep the Gauntlet because he didn't win the gauntlet in battle; he lost the gauntlet because Eternity's claim was correct and Warlock really wasn't fit to hold the power; afetr becoming "God," Adam Warlock subconsciously expelled both good and evil from his soul (you saw those aspects of his personality -namely, the Magus and the Goddess -in the Series called "The Infinity War" and "The Infinity Crusade," respectively) which to the Tribunal was reason enough to strip the Gauntlet of its powers.Thanos777 04:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Kyo-1 17:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Um... like i told you, i don't know "how powerful" is Phoenix Foce... but i don't think that Phoenix Force with the power of M'kraan Crystal is match for Galactus. BTW, In-Betweener is a Lord Chaos and Master Order creation (more powerfuls beins that Galactus himself) and this can't be discussed... but is imposibble for In-Betweener be match for Galactus: In-Bet is the "representative man" of + and - (stupid explain). Galactus IS the Force (or Agent) that balances Life (Eternity) and Death (Mistress Death).

About the "mixing" thing... is simple to undestand why i'm doing that: If Phoenix Force is more powerful that Galactus. What' stoping Phoenix and//or In-Betweener be choosen to be the "balancer of the Universe" ? Cause Galactus can control the Cosmic Power... and till i knows: In-Betweener and/or Phoenix Force Can't do like Galactus does.

With the P.S: I'm disagree with you in 2 points: - Warlock's judgd cause he is no a 'livin' being like Thanos (Adam never had a chilhood. ;)) and that's why Eternity is disagree with Adam's desition to keep the Gauntlet. - If the Gems can't works in unison like demand Eternity to the L.T. in the end of the Infinity War... Why Galactus is looking for the Gems in "The End" and Thanos said that Galactus could remove his hungry "Only Wishing it" (Issue #5)??. Yeah, i know about "Hunger" data manipulation, but Thanos told to himself that... And if Thanos is right (and all of us knows that Thanos rarely is wrong), the gems can works together (Via Crux) to feed Galactus. ;)

Sorry for the misspellings of today... the sleep won the battle agains me.

Series of Replies to all whom it may concern:

Kyo: "Um... like i told you, i don't know 'how powerful' is Phoenix Foce... but i don't think that Phoenix Force with the power of M'kraan Crystal is match for Galactus."

In terms of raw power output alone, the Phoenix Force FAR EXCEEDS Galactus. And energy explusion is the very least of the Phoenix Force's abilities.

The Pheonix Force draws its power from all life in the Marvel Universe; the more lifeforces that she draws from (in a metaphysical way; there is no canon evidece to show that she harms the living in any way), the more powerful she becomes. All you need do to show the scope of the Phoenix Force's powers is to read the very Article that we have here. Afterwards, read Galactus' file for a comparison.

Galactus doesn't even come close, not even when he sheds his armor and reveals his true Energy Form (in fact, apart from the ability to expend tremendous amounts of energy and to be the unparallelled master of the Power Cosmic, Galactus simply isn't capable of very much at all; most effects that Galactus has been shown performing, that don't involve energy and Power Cosmic manipulation, have been done through the use of his worldship's technology).

Galactus' most awesome expenditure of energy to date was just recently, in the final issue of the "Annihilation" miniseries, when he willingly went to his real, pure energy form, "went nova" and destroyed a "mere" two or three star systems; furthermore, Annihilus himself was able to withstand it.

I seriously doubt that anyone here intimately familiar with Marvel Comics would tell you that Annihilus would have made it if the Phoenix Force decided to snuff him out. Neither would a large chunk of the existing Universe in that region of space (again, read the Wiki Article).

You're having an apparently hard time in accepting the simple fact that a given being's power level is nowhere near as important as his station in the Universe, and at prsent I can't help you with that, because in my view that would require a whooooole lot more reading on your part. Please don't take offense to this last, it's just my honest assessment of what I percieve your knowledge of the Powers of the Marvel Universe to be. Obviously, if you can cite specific comic references to back up what you believe to be the case, that's a different matter....

Kyo: "In-Betweener is a Lord Chaos and Master Order creation (more powerfuls beins that Galactus himself) and this can't be discussed... but is imposibble for In-Betweener be match for Galactus:"

The In-Betweener is the metaphysical counterpart to Galactus; Galactus is the "in-Betweener" of Life and Death, and the In-Betweener is, well, the in-betweener of Chaos and Order. The In-Betweener's relationship to Galactus was revealed in the now years-old Silver Surfer series which was drawn almost exclusively by Ron Lim; specifically, Silver Surfer Volume 3, #17 (I still remember the cover).

The In-Betweener is an exact match for Galactus....unless they are in a mystic as opposed to a physical realm, and in that issue that is precisely what happened (they were drifitng towards a Black Hole which had a mystical dimension on the other "side" of it. The In-Betweener got stronger and stronger the nearer that the two battling beings got to the event horizon).

Kyo: - Warlock's judgd cause he is no a 'livin' being like Thanos (Adam never had a chilhood. ;)) and that's why Eternity is disagree with Adam's desition to keep the Gauntlet.

Incorrect.

The Living Tribunal judged Warlock mentally unfit to wield the Gauntlet in "Adam Warlock and the Infinity Watch" #1; the reasons for Warlock's mental instability and unsuitability to be God were fleshed out in future Issues of the "...Infinity Watch," as well as in the following series "The Infinity War" and the "The Infinity Crusade."


Kyo: - If the Gems can't works in unison like demand Eternity to the L.T. in the end of the Infinity War... Why Galactus is looking for the Gems in "The End" and Thanos said that Galactus could remove his hungry "Only Wishing it"


Beacuse that's true; the Gems can't work in unison, but they can be used creatively; do you not remember the Man-Beast and his Machine, which brought forth the Infinity Thrall?? Thanos was correct; with the Gems, Galactus could indeed creatively use them in turn to wish away his hunger, had he himself not been mentally manipulated and confused by the being Hunger itself. For example, he could use the Power Gem to simply infinitely multiply the Life Energy from a suitable Planet, and feed off the energies of that one planet forever, or use the Time Gem to freeze his hunger (why would Galan have to eat every 30 days if he froze time in a small region of space relative to himself?), or, had he chose to risk it, try using the Reality Gem to alter his own personal reality to simply not be hungry anymore.

EACH of those Gems kick much arse in their own right; you could potentially conquer a Universe with any single one of them, save possibly the Soul Gem.


Kyo: Sorry for the misspellings of today... the sleep won the battle agains me.


You got that right; it took a few passes to understand some of the sentences....


ManofSteel: There has also been evidence to suggest that a fully sated Galactus is indeed an equal to Eternity. In fact, Eternity himself once stated such.

If it has been stated, then we must (potentially) take it as Canon; however, considering the vast number of times that Galactus has had his keester handed to him, when he MUST have been "fully sated" at least some of those times as you say, seems to indicate otherwise.

I mean, the feller has been repulsed several times in the past by fleets of Kree/Skrull/who-knows-who Warships; I sincerely doubt that any such attack would work on Eternity...

Not trying to start an Argument here, but this "Galactus equals Eternity" statement smells strongly of "Squirrel Girl/Ka-Zar/She-Hulk defeats Thanos" type loosely researched writing, or a "The End" type scenario (ye GODS, what a mess that series made to 616 continuity, even though I like it)..... Thanos777 05:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Kyo-1 16:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Kyo: "Um... like i told you, i don't know 'how powerful' is Phoenix Foce... but i don't think that Phoenix Force with the power of M'kraan Crystal is match for Galactus."

Thanos777: In terms of raw power output alone, the Phoenix Force FAR EXCEEDS Galactus. And energy explusion is the very least of the Phoenix Force's abilities.

The Pheonix Force draws its power from all life in the Marvel Universe; the more lifeforces that she draws from (in a metaphysical way; there is no canon evidece to show that she harms the living in any way), the more powerful she becomes. All you need do to show the scope of the Phoenix Force's powers is to read the very Article that we have here. Afterwards, read Galactus' file for a comparison.

Then if you're right... Why Galactus is capable to absorb the Phoenix Force 'army' when he was feeding fron a Xiar Sun (i think) ?? O__o. (If you ask me the comic, i don't remember what the exact comic was... ^^U i remember this fron a "Cosmic Powers" issue).

About the I.G. 'power'... is simple to understand: "How you could put a limit to the Infinity ??" (Thanos Quote). Like i told you some time ago, the I.G. don't works in Adam like works in Thanos, cause Thanos 'knows' the nature of the Gems and Adams 'knows' how-to-usse the I.G. . ;). Maybe, the "Balance" of the Marvel Megaverse are the Heart of the Universe in counterpart of the I.G. ((Spirit Form vs Phisyc Form). And you said it before, and me before than you "The Gems are the 'corpse' of the One Above All".

Sorry for the misspeling, i have a hard resac. >_< i must stop drink beer. XDDD

[edit] The Most Powerful Eternal?

Is this ("the most powerful of the Eternals") really true? I mean, is he considered to been more powerful even than Zuras was? 70.53.108.169 14:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If Thanos could go toe-to-toe with Odin, even though he lost I think he'd probably be able to beat Zuras. Todd Bridges 20:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I've read that he was the most powerful of the Titan born Eternals but I've never heard of him being referred to as the most powerful Eternal, period. Zuras was the most powerful of the Earth born Eternals and, to my knowledge, never faced Thanos in battle so who was more powerful can only be assumed since Zuras is dead. Thanos is probably the most powerful Eternal still living, but labeling him as the overall most powerful ever is subject to debate. Odin's Beard 02:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd say Kronos is... except he died first and then became powerful.

Kronos MAY be more powerful than Thanos is now, but then again he isn't, technically, an Eternal.Thanos777

As to the Eternals that do still exist, Thanos has demonstrated powers and abilities FAR beyond all of them, even Zuras, even before Death returned him to life with vastly improved capabilities (he easily whupped the Surfer's butt, and there ain't an Eternal that I can think of that whup Surfer), and even before he emerged from the events of "Thanos: The End" with what he called "enhancements" (but which he did not specify) to help protect him from his enemies. Not to mention that he defeated a Cosmic Cube (Kosmos/Beyonder) in one-on-one battle recently.Thanos777 20:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how the question can really be answered considering Zuras never fought either the Surfer or Thanos. He was a worthy opponent of Zeus; that's got to mean something. 70.50.54.186 02:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earth X

Should it be mentioned that in the universe of Earth X, Thanos' distinctive appearance was due to his mother having been a Skrull? Ekchuah 12:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

If its mentioned specifically that such is the case only within the Earth X Universe, then yes. In the 616 universe, his appearance is due to "deviant syndrome", and not partial Skrull parentage. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 5 July 2006
I might add an 'Alternate Versions' or 'Earth X' section about the Earth/Universe/Paradise X version. It departs in several ways from the 616 version: his appearance owned to his mother having been a Skrull (his siblings looked 'human' because she learned to shift her organs after his birth), he believed his mother to have been Death, and was manipulated by Death in furtherance of his belief to act as her servant. Would anybody mind that? Ekchuah 05:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea to me. --Mrph 00:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bias

Is the part of Thanos' history covering Thanos: The End as free of bias as it could be? The length dedicated to that one mini-series and certain phrases such as "the cunning being that he is" seem to show to much favortism. I do not argue that he isn't cunning, but that is discussed under the powers section. On the length part, several paragraphs are dedicated to it compared to the much smaller onces covering his previous exploits.

Doesn't suggest any bias to me at all. Thanos "the cunning being that he is" is like stating something about how vastly strong beings like the Hulk and Thor are. The mini-series istelf was called Marvel: The End, it just happened to revolve around Thanos' latest bid to gain omnipotence. I feel, however, that it deserves it's own section or an explanation because "The End" series in and of itself isn't canon, especially with the way they worked it out as to where Thanos gives up his omnipotence, yet again. Odin's Beard 01:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adrenaline Rush?

Maybe that is the cause of Namor Lifting several thousand tons.--ThanosMadTitan23 02:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Astral Projection

How many times has Thanos used astral projection without some sort of aid, ie. Moondragon? HoosierDaddy 14:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

At least twice that I can recall, appearing once to the Silver Surfer while he traveled across space not long after Death had ressurrected him, and in a Deadpool comic trying to impress Death. Neither occasion was it shown or implied he was being aided.

[edit] Marvel: The End

--Kyo-1 14:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC) Is possible than this history can be a MU continuation ?. In the Last Issue no-one (even Eternity or L.T.) can't remember anything about this, only Thanos and Adam Warlock do it cause they're the only 'survivors' of the End...

I'm fairly certain all the various "The End" comics are as canonical as Earth X, Days of Future Past, or any other "this is one possible future" comic. I.e., things happening in it don't necessarily relfect what's happening in the present 616 continuity. --Dr Archeville 21:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
You're right about the others 'Ends' and is wellknow that Marvel re-write his own timeline, but the Annihilation saga is suposed to be Earth 616 timeline... and if that is true: Is logic think about if "Marvel - The End" and "Thanos - Epiloge" is a 'continuity'. But the question is if Anyone knows if the Annihilation Timeline is the same timeline than Earth 616 ?? O_o.
"Annihilation saga?" You mean this? It's going on now in the current 616 contiuity, as far as I know. --Dr Archeville 19:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eternals

At what point was Thanos linked in to Kirby's Eternals - that was not part of Starlin's original version. -- Beardo 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Good question, and sadly I've no idea where to begin looking. I know the Eternals, Deviants and Celestials weren't originally meant to be part of the core Marvel Universe, and Thanos appeared approx. three years before those guys first appeared. --Dr Archeville 18:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Probably the best source with which to find out the possible answer to that is this website: http://www.corvusonline.net/thanos/thanos.html It's probably the most comprehensive and detailed website devoted to any single comic book character that I've ever seen. If the answer's not in there, then I dunno if there's any other place on the web to find it. Odin's Beard 00:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Avengers, I think. I remember a story featuring Eros, Maelstrom and the Eternals - in which the Titans and Eternals realised they were related. Not sure if that's the very first reference to it, but... --Mrph 00:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
You are correct. This tale was told in AVENGERS #246-248 (1984), where Starfox and Wasp crash one of Sersi's parties, and they all end up in Olympia. We learn that Starfox is the son of A'lars, who in turn was the brother of Zuras. My thanks to WarlordKro for this info! --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 2 December 2006
On Eternals, to say that Thanos' mother was a Skrull is a big claim. It needs sourcing to have any credibility. I sincerely hope it is not that idiot Bendis "retro-ruining" everything.

Someone provide an issue if possible.

Asgardian (talk) 11:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ultimate Thanos

Just an early warning - Marvel's Jan 2007 solicitation text states that Ultimate Thanos is about to be introduced in Ultimate Fantastic Four. I'd suggest we leave him out 'til he's published, rather than adding him now, but... --Mrph 07:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It has clearly been stated in the Ultimates 35 solicitation and interviews with Mike Carey that Gallowglass is Thanos's son.

[edit] God War

God War redirects here, but I can't see it mentioned. -- Beardo 04:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion

Thanos definitely has more Silver Surfer conflict than mentioned- I believe they fought specifically in the special issue Silver Surfer... 50 I think, though without access to the comics I am uncertain of the number. 137.99.184.148 10:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanos: killed ONCE AGAIN by Drax?!?

Sorry about my not remembering, but someone posted in the Main Article that Thanos had been killed "once again" by Drax.

Was there a first time??

I only remember two Thanos deaths:

A]] The most recent one at the hands of NewDrax.

B]] The time that Adam Warlock harnessed the power of the (actual) Soul Gem to turn him to stone.

Anybody know anything different??

Thanos777 22:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, there was an incident in which he and Mangog were in cahoots together. There was a storyline involving the two which occurred from Thor vol.2 #21-25 back in 2000. Basically, at the end of the storyline, Thor unleashes as blast that "kills" Thanos and Thor watches as Thanos' body burns. Odin's Beard 00:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanos's (Almost) Unique Nature

Seekquaze, I have posted a short missive to you regarding one of Thanos's special powers.

Thanos told the In-Betweener, in his own words, that he was invisible to the Great Powers before he ever had the Gauntlet.

I posess the books, you see. Page 19, "Schemes and Dreams," Part I of the "Thanos Quest:" ".....Of course, they [Lord Chaos and Master Order] had no way knowing that I'd come to your rescue...and that they would not be able to sense my presence."

"You see, I am one of those odd beings who is outside of Destiny's usual realm of influence."

"Chaos and Order have no power over me, and so cannot detect my comings and goings." -Thanos.

That is to say, Thanos's nature is to be undetectable by the Great Powers even before he ever posessed the Soul Gem; whether this power was granted by Death Herself, or was part of his innate nature from the very beginning, is unclear, but it was there.


If you, too, have the books, please review the pages of the first issue of the two-issue set and then get back to me.

In the interim, however, I am going to "re-reedit" the entry for Thanos to reflect what is contained in the pages of that book, and will send this Missive to you and put it on the "Thanos" Discussion Talkpage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thanos777 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC).


I read the story once, but had to get rid of the issues. Was this point ever addressed elsewhere or was it just one of those things Starlin tends to do when he writes Thanos? (I.E. "Aging" the Runner millions of years even though he had already lived billions with no evidence they age.) Seekquaze

Although to my personal knowledge this unique trait was discussed only with Adam Warlock and Thanos himself (and perhaps the same qualities would logically be present in Her as would be in Adam Warlock), the precedent does exist; moreover, one would figure that Cosmic Entities like Eternity and/or Chronos and/or Eon or any force on the "side of light" would have shut Thanos down, if only they could find his whereabouts and predict his moves in advance, seeing as how he isn't the usual, "I want to only conquer the Galaxies" (instead of destroying them all) villain and is usually a threat to even the existence of most of the Great Powers almost every time he hatches one of his schemes.

As a side note/observation about Thanos's treatment of the Runner, it makes perfect sense that Thanos should be able to use the Time Gem to override the physiological "immunity" to the effects of Time that the Elders normally posess. Thanos777 01:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

To be it does not make perfect sense because all Thanos did was age the runner. Aging an immortal who has stopped aging would have only caused millions of years to pass for him, not cause him to get old. Anyway, this is not the place to discuss this since it does not relate to the article. Seekquaze


And also because you'll go mad trying to get comics to make sense... --Charlesknight 15:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Kyo-1 05:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC) I'm not agree with the "Unique" term about this 'blessed' of Thanos. He said in Thanos Quest 1 "I am one of those odd beings" this means that Thanos is no the one which have this 'bless'... so is near-to-impossible that he (including Him and Her, Godess, Magus, Thanos' clones, etc.) is//was the only with that 'bless' in the whole Marvel Universe... i think.


(Omega-Nite)First of all the very first title/ranking Thanos has is that of Demi-God. That means that all the abilities he has is just a blink of an eye away from that of a GOD. Thats why he can stand toe to toe with Odin, tyrant, the Grandmaster,. From my knowledge of growing up with the marvel team ups. No one can best the grandmaster on a strategic level for i guess thats the reason he was given the name grandmaster. Now to just fathom the interlect Of that of Thanos the Demi-God to best the Grandmaster.

Yes, look up the word cunning in a Marvel dictionary and you will see Thantos face there. But technically he won pretty easily because he had the other infinity gems already. "Of course with the five infinity gems in my possession I could have taken thge sixth from the GrandMaster in any thousands of ways...." It's unclear though whether he used the other gems to help he beat the grandmaster (changing reality etc), or was it merely a matter of guile.--Aarontay 18:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


With that alone I see it as a direct insult to the character of all of what Thanos is to be killed my Drax the destroyer no mater what his new abilities was. Thanos clearly took on many beings of greater power and prevailed. I cant see Thanos killed unless he allowed it to happen. I figured its the writers lack of creativity to despose of Thanos in a destiny sort of way since drax was created for the sole purpose of killing Thanos. To add to that flaw is that no being im the marvel universe has the combined raw power , strength and interlect of that of Thanos. That his powers are the most even across the board on a cosmic level. Not to mention his personal ambitions.

[edit] Clarifying the "Teleportation" Issue

To date, Thanos has NEVER shown the ability to teleport himself without technology.

You really need to cite a specific reference of Thanos teleporting WITHOUT making use of a teleportation device before you add the entry to Thanos's "Powers and Abilities" Section; I am going to re-edit this section to reflect that fact -that is to say, removing Teleportation as one of Thanos's (innate) abilities.

Please remember that just as the Inhumans (a sideshoot of Earth's Eternals) dont have all the powers of Sersi, Ikari, and their ilk, so too is it that the Titanian Eternals don't have all the powers of Earth Eternals, either; for one thing, Thanos's attack on the Titan colony could NEVER have killed the "pure" Eternals of Earth as they are nearly as hard to kill as the Watchers.

For another thing, the Titanian Eternals, to the best of my knowledge, cannot form or particiapte in a Uni-Mind fusion.

Are Titanian Eternals part of the same "base stock" that the Celestials created when they separated humanity millions of years ago (un-altered Humans, potential mutants, potential mutates, Eternals, and Deviants)??

Yes.

But does "Etrnal" automatically mean that this Eternal over here has the same base set of powers as that Etrnal over there??

Nope.

Not trying to be contrarain here, just accurate. Again, if you can find the rest of us Thanos fans a specific comic and Issue that we can verify, then Thanos's entry will re-edited to reflect Teleportation as a power that he has within himself.

Thanos777 03:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This is what I got from the Thanos website DCincarnate

It has been theorized that Thanos possesses the innate ability to teleport himself over unknown distances...however the final answer is an inconclusive one. It is true that most cosmic Eternals possess the ability to teleport themselves and others psionically. Most Eternals find the process an unpleasant one, and usually prefer not to use the ability unless absolutely necessary.

During Thanos' gambit against the Magus, he seemingly used his own teleportational abilities to teleport himself and his allies. He even mentioned the difficulty involved in teleporting others, due to the intense concentration required to accomplish the feat.

Although he has been shown to teleport himself with seemingly no instrumentation, it must be noted that Thanos' had made several bionic enhancements to his original body, and it is likely that most of his teleportation feats were accomplished by remote teleportation equipment controlled via mental signals. That doesn't mean he cannot teleport himself, but it is rather more likely he prefers the efficiency of teleportation equipment to his own ability.


Even so, we cannot yet add THEORETICAL Teleportation to a list of his KNOWN innate abilities. Perhaps in the future someone will find evidence (and I just may take the time to re-read "The Infinity War" soon......

Thanos777 02:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I have to agree. Thanos has only ever been shown to teleport via technology, such as his mobile chair or tech in his gauntlets (similar to his force fields).

Asgardian 09:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

In one of his earliest appearances Thanos went between locations using "Mental phasing", and commented how it required intense concentration, he then later phased himself, Gamora and Warlock in the same way. I think that would go down as a form of unaided teleportation. - 12 January

  • Not if you can't source it or sign your posts.

Asgardian 23:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Warlock Volume 1 Issue #11. Thanos: "As you noticed mentally phasing more than one self to any locale requires intense concentration that is not possible admist a battle royal! That is why I was forced to keep those Black Knights occupied while you escaped, then catch up with you later by lone phasing!" - Thanos after "phasing" himself, Warlock, Gamora and Pip. Nightwing 1 21:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks for the assist

Thanks to those who helped with the tidy up. I was going to come back today and take care of the remaining trimmings, but it's nice to see others taking an interest. It took quite a few hours, but the article is now at the standard it should be. Unfortunately it also opened doors to other articles that aren't up to scratch...

Asgardian 07:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strong is Thanos in the Force...but not THAT strong..

Thanos, to the best of my knowledge, does NOT actually have Telekinesis, and furthermore NONE of his powers are even close to matching up to the power of the Phoenix Force.

The upper limits of the Phoenix Force's powers -which spans the entire range of psionic powers and which derives nearly unlimited power from all the living beings of the universe -nearly rival those of Marvel's Cosmic Powers.

When Thanos tears apart a star using Psionic Force (as did Dark Phoenix), let me know.....

For the time being, I'm going to remove the entry that describes Thanos as actaully having telekinesis, and furthermore ask the Wiki member that made the addendum to give a specific Comic citation for any demonstrations by Thanos of telekinesis.

Telepathy, yes; TK, no. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thanos777 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

I wasn't the member that added the original entry for telekenesis as an ability, but in issue #12 of his solo series during his fight with Fallen One, Thanos appears to direct a number of asteroids at his opponent using telekinesis, his hand is pointing at Fallen One and suddenly the asteroids fly at Fallen One and hit him sending him backwards into the nearby planet's atmosphere. I can't think of any of Thanos' existing powers which would enable that, it comes across as telekinesis. Also in issue #4 of the Silver Surfer Annihilation mini he appears to raise himself up by raising the mound of earth he is stood into the air on until he is high enough to communicate with Aegis and Tenebrous Nightwing 1 21:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll have to take a look at the Thanos Series when I get a chance, but I don't remember the TK of which you speak.

In advance and before I leave, however, I'll also let you know that NONE of Thanos's prior O.H.O.T.M.U. Entries list TK as one of his mental powers....Thanos777 03:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


Addemdum: at very best, that use by Thanos of that power -attracting those asteroids to the local region --is inconclusive, particularly when in most instances of a mental power being utilized, by Thanos or anybody else --that Psionic powers are typically indicated by some sort of drawing of energy on or around the forehead.

That was evident in at least part of Thanos's battle in an earlier issue of The Maker/Kosmos/Beyonder.

As to the "raising the pillar" incident in 'Annihilation,' I am not 100% sure right now, but I could've sworn tha Thanos posessed the ability to manipulate matter; if it were actually TK, then he would have only had to raise a small slab of rock instead of raise the whole pillar.

Can't speak for others, but I say that any evidence of innate TK in Thanos is inconclusive at very best... Thanos777 03:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

There may not have been any indications in the drawing that Thanos was using mental powers to attract the asteroids, but I can't think of any of his other powers which would allow him to move them, he has his hand directed towards Fallen One and the asteroids suddenly fly at him, telekinesis seems to be as good a way of describing it as any if you ask me. And the Annihilation example, he does just lift the small area of earth he is stood on into the air. Perhaps matter manipulation could be used to simulate telekinesis in those cases. One thing to point out both those examples were written by Keith Giffen and both happened fairly recently, after The End, it could have been a newly accquired power Giffen wanted Thanos to have. I think the handbooks say Thanos can't manipulate matter by the way, despite the fact he has in the comics, so they are not always 100% accurate. I'm not going to edit the page and put telekinesis back in as a power as I never added it originally, but I think he has demonstrated abilties mimicing it at least. Nightwing 1 12:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm no expert of course (I'll give that to Corvus) but I think that debating why or how Thanos accomplishes any task is an excercise in futility. Here's why I think that. Cheif among his arsenal of abilities IMHO is strategy. The fact that asteroids flew towards an individual when Thanos pointed at that individual could likely have been accomplished by Thanos in about 7 hundred million ways. It's equally as likely that he has telekinesis as it is that he traveled back in time and set some geological or gravitational event into motion that would trigger at the exact moment he pointed at said individual. Even the times when he has specifically outlined how he accomplished any particular feat, his explantion is dubious at best. In conclusion, if your name isn't Thanos or Adam Warlock, then there's know way you know what he can or can't do. 24.22.236.198 04:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)James

These are clear examples of TK. Let's not get too nerdy here. He moves things without physically touching them, regardless of any speculation on how he achieves this, unless it's explained within canon as not being TK, it's TK. 66.167.147.162 17:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanos' motivations

Thanos possesses a superhuman intellect that is almost obsessively dedicated to the annihilation of life and the mastery of any technology or mysticism that will enable him to achieve this goal.

Didn't Thanos outgrew those motivations after the Infinity Gauntlet affair? Nowadays, the only things that drive is the pursuit of power, knowledge, and a daunting challenge to prove himself against. Peter David and Jim Starlin even retcon events that showcase nihilistic tendencies from Thanos. - Marikina

>Yup. 'Used to be' works better for me as well.

[edit] Images

I am not sure why this image would be deleted. In my humble opinion, the art work is very good, it is relevant to the story and it is as good if not better then the cover shot that was put up in it's place. [[Image:Thanos2a.jpg|300px|thumb|left|Thanos with the Infinity Gauntlet as the heroes converge to attack. Art by Jim Starlin.]] Yes I understand that, in some people's opinions, too many images may take away from the article, but this image grabs the eye and many people will click on it and study all the characters that are about to converge on Thanos.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.228.55.157 (talk • contribs)

Too many images in an article violate fair use policies. There are thousands if not millions of "good" pics out there, but that's not a reason to include them. CovenantD 18:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is Thanatos the only resonance here?

It appears to me that the Scottish title of "thane" might be played upon here aswell. We all know that the murderous figure at the center of "The Scottish Play" is a thane. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 11:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, good point. However Thanos has little in common with the thane of Mac ... ahem, sorry The Scottish Play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

[edit] Thanos sacrificing himself to save the universe

Considering he has spent his life trying to destroy the universe I find it odd that he would give his life to save it. Could someone please explain why he does this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

Oh why is everyone ignoring me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.241.99 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 12 April 2007

simple.
If this Universe is destroyed, then Thanos loses THIS version of Death, whom he still obviously loves greatly despite his pretense to the contrary. All that aside, remember that Thanos doesn't go around just killing willy-nilly....unless Mistress Death asks.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanos777 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 12 May 2007

[edit] Images

No more insistence on changing images without discussion. Thank you.

Asgardian 07:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Have you seen other articles? We don't have images in a line up, and if you're going to have them at that small size, then you might just well remove them. Yes, articles arn't fashion shows, but there's no need to reduce the images so you can barely see them.
And that other Ultimate Thanos image I have is better, because it takes less space. -- DCincarnate

The images here actually work in this fashion. I'm happy to have one on the right, but where you went overboard was the size and placement of some of them. I'll move Mangog and then have a look.

Asgardian 08:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I have put up my new version. -- DCincarnate 16:48, 12 April 2007
This article has a lot of images now. While I enjoy this from a purely stylistic point of view, I felt compelled to take a look and see the fair use justification for them. Unfortunately, none of the ones that I checked had one. As long as the images don't have this justification, they are in danger of being removed from Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it's not enough to tag the image with a fair use template. You have to give reasons why the image is needed for the article. Superman has some great examples of this. Cheers, GentlemanGhost 13:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Starlin's creation of character

Haven't seen any information on the circumstances or inspiration that led to Jim Starlin's creating of Thanos, Drax, Kronos, etc. Even in the linked Starlin interview, although he credits Jack Kirby as his chief youthful inspiration, he never goes into if Thanos was a hommage/take-off/variation of Kirby's DC "Fourth World" creation of just a couple of years earlier, Darkseid (which I always assumed it was, and I was reading both the Jimmy Olsen/Forever People/New Gods/Mister Miracle and Iron Man/Captain Marvel/Marvel Two-In-One/Avengers/Adam Warlock stuff as it was coming out). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.120.224 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 12 May 2007

[edit] Abilities listing

It seems there is a minor revert war occurring between User:Asgardian and User:Manssiere over the SHB abilities listing. Due to the involvement of certain users it seems a concensus needs to be reached or a never ending revert war will ensue.

Last version by Manssiere:
Superhuman strength, reflexes, intelligence, physical resistance, energy blasts, force field generation, molecular manipulation, mind control, teleportation, healing, immortality

Last version by Asgardian:
Superhuman strength, intellect, speed, agility, stamina and durability
Cosmic energy manipulation,
Matter transmutation
Psionic powers,
Teleportation

TheBalance 14:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Naturally, I support the revision I made. It's a fairly concise listing of Thanos' abilities with links to explanations of the listed abilities. The original abilities listing is only marginally shorter, and frankly doesn't look as tidy in the SHB. Manssiere 21:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

His powers are explained in the P & A section below. The power list is suppose to be short. Energy blasts are part of his energy manipulation, like mind control is part of his psionic powers. -- DCincarnate 18:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

As explained on the Tyrant talk page the definitions of terms energy blast, mind control, etc. are not — and should not — be defined in the powers and abilities section of the article. The purpose of the powers and abilities section is to list and briefly explain powers and abilities, not to define commonly used comic book related terminology. Some people are not aware of the definitions of teleportation, superhuman strength, psionic powers, invulnerability, etc. and that is precisely why the List of comic book superpowers article exists. I see no reason not to provide links to it and have yet to hear an acceptable reason not to.

Manssiere 15:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I second User:Manssiere's version of abilities listing. TheBalance 16:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: the new claims, how can Thanos be immortal if killed by Drax? Has it ever been stated he is immortal? Also, "healing" is nebulous and anyone will heal over time. I'd only include that if someone can heal like the Hulk, which means instantaneously. Not so Thanos. I also support brevity. If going the way of linking each ability, then it needs to be a) clear and b) done for every character.

Asgardian 00:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

There are several forms of immortality, Asgardian. The absence of senescence, as found in some bacteria, is considered biological immortality. You do not have to be completely "unkillable" to be considered immortal. Regarding healing abilities,

if you would have bothered to follow the link you would have seen the clarification, it does not refer to a healing factor as seen in Wolverine or the Hulk. Manssiere 14:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

That was rather immature. There's also been discussion of immortality in the past. I'll see if Doczilla can't settle this, as the issue here is not so much Thanos but consistency across the board, as per my last point. If it goes that way, fine - but don't be snide.

Asgardian 04:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I see nothing immature or snide in my response to you. I will even provide the links again so you can follow them this time: Healing abilities -- Immortality. As far as consistency, the Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Superherobox example provides links in it's abilities listing.

Manssiere 15:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing? This is a good start - "if you would have bothered". But, you appear to have pulled healing anyway.

Asgardian 11:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Captainmarvel28.jpg

Image:Captainmarvel28.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This has since been replaced as it was pulled without discussion. Have made some other addition but not kept very bias and emotive retelling of story. Please just convey the facts.

Asgardian (talk) 06:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Avoids physical confrontation?

From the article: "He is a formidable combatant, but typically avoids physical confrontation and prefers to outwit his enemies." Could anyone name an example of this? I can't seem to remember anything of the like... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.152.177.161 (talk) 03:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Darkseid and Mongul

I seem to recall something about Starlin creating Thanos as a homage to Darkseid and then, at DC, and with obvious irony, creating Mongul as a homage to Thanos. Does anyone else recall this, and can they find a source? Kelvingreen (talk) 23:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I also recall this, but don't remember from where. Maybe someone else knows? Dave (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
It certainly seems to be the case that Ultimate Thanos is based on taking the "Thanos as variant Darkseid" concept and running with it. Daibhid C (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Yup, it even fitted in explicit counterparts for the Forever People, and put Ronan, and Terrax (sort of) into 'semi-Orion & Kalibak' roles. Dave (talk) 10:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Strength

Some editors seem to believe that numbers correlate to strength and that someone with a higher number then someone else cannot be beaten by that person. Or whatever. In terms of Marvel, in terms of the story written, it's possible for anyone to beat anyone. Of course, now I am going to use a DC example but I think it works. Connor Hawke and Ray Palmer would lose to Darkseid (yes, I recognize the irony of mentioning him) in a fist fight but in a JLA (alternate timeline) they use their abillities to kill Darkseid. Strength mattered not one whit. And if I am completely misinterpeting editor's attidues...ah, well, it's still a good thing for any Wiki editor/comic book fan to keep in mind. Lots42 (talk) 01:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Nah, that's obviously not true. Thanos is listed as a few times physically stronger than calm Thor, but is not as good a combattant. Heck train a 90 pound weakling in wielding a katana and put him agains against a world champion weight lifter, and he'd probably win, as one hit would be fatal. Dave (talk) 17:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I am confused. What is not true. I completely agree with what you are saying. Lots42 (talk) 02:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not true that I think strength is the only decisive factor in a fight. However, it should be noted, and this is coming directly from George Scott, former world boxing champion, that lack of glamour and mythos notwithstanding (Karelin-style) wrestlers are easily among the most dangerous 1-on-1 unarmed fighters on the planet, far, far more so than heavyweight boxers, and most alternatives where kicks are allowed as well. Virtually any opponent would go down in seconds in close quarters. Armed combat is a wholly different issue. As I roughly remember Emin Boztepe saying in a local fighting magasine many years ago, someone holding a decent sword for almost the first time is equivalent to an unarmed fighter who's trained intensely for 15 years. That said, this isn't remotely real life, or characters with real human vulnerabilities, and force of attack seems to have very little to do miss mass and acceleration. Technically, almost any speedster should hit a lot harder than almost any strongman, but that doesn't satisfy the medium's story format. Dave (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] The Re-edits

There seems to be a consistent pov reverting of matter-of-fact accounts of stories that did not show Galactus as omnipotent and infallible. That said, a few of the old issues seem to be abandoned, so we may be getting somewhere. It should be noted that I don't at all mind (and actually appreciate) the cleaning of my sentence structures, just if the context will be easily misread from what actually was explicitly shown or stated to happen.

The current issues seem to be the following:

  • Portraying the confrontation with Hunger as an even fight, rather than that Galactus was shown as completely ineffectual, and outright stating that his might was as nothing in comparison.
  • Portraying Galactus as completely unthreathened and undamaged at the time of the Fallen One's assault, which he wasn't. The point of the story was that Galactus was shown as still greatly weakened by the planetary impacts and nuclear arsenal combination, and that Thanos offered to save him due to his necessity for the natural order.
  • Thanos 'defeating' the Fallen One. - Which he didn't, he tricked it into defeating itself.
  • Alternately enslaving the 'cosmic entity'. - It's not nearly powerful enough to qualify as a cosmic entity.

Additionally there seems to be problems with me reworking the powers section, to be more in line with other entries listing examples of extent, such as Thor or Silver Surfer.

  • This includes citing Thanos blasts destroying a planet. - Drax recounted this tale of this earlier battle in his first appearance if I don't misremember.
  • Knocking Galactus off his feet. - Also correct, but Galactus was taken by surprise, which was also noted.
  • Absorbing enormous amounts of energy. - The understatement of the year, as Thanos literally absorbed the powers of a God.
  • Deflecting blasts. - A very limited assault from an amnesiac Beyonder.
  • Manipulating matter. - He healed the injuries of a companion while visiting the Kyln.
  • Using telekinesis. - Thanos controlled the movement of several small asteroids during his battle with the Fallen One.
  • Thanos' force shields protecting him from assaults by far more powerful foes, such as power-gem infused Champion of the Universe, Odin, or Galactus. - Technically he never stated out loud that he used the protection against Odin, even if these were established considerably earlier, so I could see removing it, but in any case Odin did say that he exerted himself in the final assault, as did Galactus. However, in both cited cases cases, Thanos was barely conscious afterwards.

Then again, Jim Starlin tends to power down any character in the room with one of his pet creations, alternately turn these far more stupid than they should be for the sake of convenience. In Marvel: The End there was no rational explanation for this 'even more powerful than the Infinity Gauntlet power source. It was just there for Thanos' convenience as usual, and the story featured the Living Tribunal in a team-up with the 'street-level' Marvel Heroes, without any of them being destroyed by the full multiverse-destroying level power release, and the first 6 Thanos comics directly followed this, so it was a pretty inane period to cite all in all. I might accept removing the absorbtion, or Galactus references in the powers section, but not in the earlier story description, as this would be misleading. Dave (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Two replies. 'The End' is an alternate universe story so the powers involved doesn't really matter. Lastly, long term revert wars, like what is happening here, stink. Three reverts in the same day gets someone in 'trouble', three reverts of the same in a week, well...come on, people. Just come on. Lots42 (talk) 09:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
There are some problems with the additions. Firstly, the term "vast" or even "vastly" is not used as it is nebulous and implies POV. "simultaneously multitasking" is also very clumsy and not in accordance with an article that must cater to comic affecionado and layman alike. I've fixed that by altering a few terms and still being able to present the events, without any POV. All that is needed is the facts, without spin. The entry on the Fallen One has also been corrected and again, just presents the facts.

I note that both edits do not do Galactus any favours: this may or may not be favouritism towards Thanos, but the problem is now sidelined as it is a straight account without interpretation. It is all there - there is no need to now lionize one character at the expense of another.

Finally, there is enough in the P & A section to convey an impression of Thanos' abilities. In this instance, the editor in question seems to be trying to deliberately make a point about how powerful Thanos is - again at the expense of other characters. We do not as a rule do "match ups" in P & A because they are meaningless to a layman and also doubly so because we are ultimately talking about fictional characters. If such things were to be included there would have to an entire ratings system, and such things are inherently flawed (eg. OHOTMU) as they are based on subjective judgements.

I hope this helps.

Asgardian (talk) 11:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)