Talk:Secret Invasion

Reading Order

We need a reading order for this. As far as I know, the first two issues are Illuminati 05 and A: The Initiative Annual 01 (in that order). Dracoster (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, its New Avengers: Illuminati, but the first issue that deals with it is New Avengers #31 p. 20, when they find the first Skrull. But I am sure marvel will release one, if they have not already. Rau J16 22:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

They've only released an release order. Dracoster (talk) 02:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

They have? Because that could be very useful. Rau's talk 04:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

According to an interview, the first issue to deal with the Secret Invasion was New Avengers #1, but according to solicitations, it was Avengers #500. Do we go back that far, or only as far as the characters knowing about it? Rau's talk 20:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Irving Griffin

This article lists this character as being a skrull, based off the Marvel Holiday Special 2007. My question, to consider: is this canon? To my knowledge, the Holiday Specials are one shot issues that do not tie in to any other stories (i.e. they are non-canonical), and hence, would not tie into the Secret Invasion. Also, I'm not actually sure this character existed prior to this issue, nor if he will ever be seen again. Depending on the context in which this character is revealed as a skrull (and I have not seen the 2007 Holiday Special yet, so I do not know the true context myself) I would consider removing this character from the list of "Known Imposters" since he does not appear to be a character that actually exists within Marvel canon. 64.203.163.246 (talk) 05:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

i have put in a non-canon part to the reveals section, it includes the above character and Sally Floyd's "reveal" in World War Hulk: Front Line #5 (10 Reasons to Hate Sally Floyd) --- Paulley (talk)

That still does not make any sense. New Avengers is just going into it's 40's. Secret invasion will probaly finished when it gets to #53. I think it should be deleted as should Irving Griffen because they HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SECRET INVASION. Thelaststand3 17:17 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I at first deleted them both, but in fact i think there is no proof to state that they are out of canon... where does it say that the story that involves Griffin has nothing to do with these fictional events. So there is an argument to keep him as an actual reveal. However, at least with Floyd we can clearly state that the story was a humorous end of issue page filler and after the New Avengers issue which the comic story stated she would be revealed hits the stands we can clearly add that it did not come to pass.... though personally i think we can keep them in an out of continuity respect as in the "Nextwave: Agents of Hate" & "SpiderHam"'s civil war parodies, as well as Rhode Island's initiative team Miles Flatt and his amazing Guitar of Death. All out of continuity and yet all mentioned within the subjects the elude to--- Paulley (talk) 23:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible Out of Continuity reveals poll

Just a little poll to see how people feel about the subject. please add your for and against comments and vote if you wish.

Irving Griffin - Holiday Special

Reasons for Keep

• There is nothing to state that this issue is out of canon (The Loners section of the book is considered canon so why wouldn't this be) where does it say that the story that involves Griffin has nothing to do with these fictional events.
• Even if its is out of continuity, Nextwave: Agents of H.A.T.E. & Spider-Ham's Civil War parodies, as well as Rhode Island's initiative team Miles Flatt and his amazing Guitar of Death. All out of continuity and yet all mentioned within the subjects the elude to.

Reasons for removal

• If out of continuity then it would have nothing to do with the articles storyline.

Vote

• Keep, even if out of continuity (which it may not be) it still has been based on the secret invasion storyline and it is from Marvel. So if it relates to the subject matter and is released from the same publisher why shouldn't it be there. --- Paulley (talk)
• add i agree with paulley, he said it nicely. Rau J16 23:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
• Remove Holiday Specials are just a bit of fun and has nothing to do with what is currently going on elsewhere. I'm sure it was just meant as a joke. Thelaststand3 18:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
• remove nothing to do with Secret Invasion, the subject of this article. You can mention it in the Skrull article, similar to the examples in your "reasons for keep" but it's irrelevant for this story. --Maestro25 (talk) 06:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• Remove or Change The Marvel Holiday Special 2007 features a story in which Spider-Man attempted to bring Aunt May a cake for her Christmas Party - but if the Holiday Special was part of continuity, she would have still been in the hospital, in a coma. The previous year featured a story in which the Hulk was apparently being held prisoner by AIM, while he still should have been off on Sakaar during the events of Planet Hulk. This leads me to my initial assumption - that the events of the Marvel Holiday Special are non-canonical (unless otherwise referenced) and thus does not belong within this article. A parody section may be appropriate, which could include both this incident and the Sally Floyd article, but I do not believe it belongs in the list of "Known Impostors" because he is otherwise completely unknown within the canonical Marvel Universe. 199.111.169.162 (talk) 17:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually the story takes place in the post-OMD continuity, according to the writer (who was ordered to exclude Mary Jane from the proceedings).MultipleTom (talk) 23:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sally Floyd - World War Hulk - Front Line #5

Reasons for Keep

• Out of continuity, Nextwave: Agents of H.A.T.E. & Spider Ham's civil war parodies, as well as Rhode Island's initiative team Miles Flatt and his amazing Guitar of Death. All out of continuity and yet all mentioned within the subjects the elude to.

Reasons for removal

• obviously out of continuity so it would have nothing to do with the articles storyline.

Vote

• remove / merge into article - Though it would be interesting to state that "the writers of the back of issue humor story stated that she would be revealed in New Avengers 53, it did not come to pass". However, i don't think it needs to be placed within the known skrulls section. --- Paulley (talk)
• add It is still related to the Secret Invasion. Whether or not it is canon is irrelevant. Rau J16 23:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
• Remove This has nothing to do with Secret Invasion. 1st thing this was was joke from the writter. 2nd this comic was out even before Secret Invasion was announced and didn't mention it by name so who can you assume it has anything to do with it. 3rd it said she was going to be revealed in #53. Secret Invasion will be finished by the time it gets that issue and why would they says she was going to be revealed in that issue? It would completly spoil the story.

Thelaststand3 18:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• remove per reasons directly above. --Maestro25 (talk) 06:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• remove It was clearly an out of continuity joke. Hermiod (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Agent X?

Where is this from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.110.148 (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

About Crusader (Marvel Comics)

Does he count as a reveal cause he was known to be a skrull in Marvel Team up before the initiative.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 02:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Well considering other people have been removed under the pretense of being a skrull but having no impact on the story. I think that might be the case here which would mean he doesnt belong. but i wish they would stop citing issue nine, its not even out yet. Rau J16 02:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I bet it will affect the story, but it is not a reveal, also issue 9 has a preview (given by Marvel) that shows him being a skrull.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 03:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I dunno, i mean yea, i could see this being mentioned, but not that it will have a very big affect on it. Also, if he was revealed so long ago, i doubt he is part of the invasion. Rau J16 03:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The point is that he's NOT the Skrull the Revolutionary was reporting to, he's a rogue Skrull attempting to fit into Earth society since he likes it. He might not even know about the Skrull invasion.

Well, this is for the secret invasion, so according to consensus he does not belong. Rau J16 11:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, unless he plays a semi-big part in the mini series, but even then he is not a reveal. So he is out.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 15:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

And i think i should say something else, Xavin is not part of the invasion either, hes just a Skrull who happens to reside on earth. Rau J16 17:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No, unless Xavin is somehow related to the stroy, IE: she has a part in it, then she should not go in here.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

he has a part in it? Rau J16 18:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that if I remember correctly before the Crusader was the Crusader in Marvel Team-Up he was revealed to be a Skrull posing as a human. Then in a recent Avengers: The Initiative issue he (via internal monologue) stated that he was sent to Earth to pose as a human and spy. But he came to like it and became the Crusader. So what I get from that is that he is a part of the Secret Invasion (as his "pose as a human and spy" bit is exactly how they operate in this storyline)... but that he has since defected go pursue his own agenda of superheroing.--Venomaru 2.0 (talk) 13:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

All of that seems like a lot fo words to say "wait and see". Rau J16 19:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• He is back in the list of Known Imposters. Haven't read that issue so could someone that has please confirm his inclusion as fact. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(Un)Known Impostor

Under the section "Known Impostors" this article has at times both listed and not listed the *unknown* Camp Hammond operative revealed in Avengers: The Initiative Annual #1. I feel as if this character should be removed from the list of "Known Impostors" (at least until we know who they really are) or the heading of that section should be changed to fit (to list an "Unknown" impostor under the section for "Known" impostors is senseless).FallenSon (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

you've got a point... Perhaps since we do not know who he is, we should leave him out and give him a mention in the plot summary.Rau J16 18:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

"Production" and "Background"

After picking at the little things for a bit (I was the person who originally questioned the merits of "Irving Griffin" and who removed the *unknown* Camp Hammond operative from the *known* impostors list) I've gone ahead and made a couple pretty major changes to the article. First, I removed a large chunk of text from the "Production" section that was primarily plot synopsis repeated under the former subcategory "Background". At the same time, I have changed the "Background" section to "Plot Synopsis", because having two different sections for the Infiltration ("Background") and the main story ("Plot Synopsis") seemed redundant. If you object, feel free to say so and/or change it back, but I feel as if the changes I have made are better for the article at large.FallenSon (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Tie-ins

Does anyone know if a list of tie-ins has been shown yet? (Not for the infiltration, but the main event). Bluecatcinema (talk) 14:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

If there was, it would be here. Rau J16 19:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the source for those tie-ins? Rau's talk 22:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I added some, but i dont have one for all. Rau's talk 23:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It should be added that Captain Marvel, Vol. 5 #3 was left off of the list that showed up here. I added it because it has specific ties and reveals to Captain Marvel revealing.HEdwards2007 (talk) 01:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Good. Way to follow WP:BOLD. Rau's talk 02:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we should change the way the Tie-Ins are put. Start by putting "The Infiltration" at the start in order of release by month and then underneath do the same for the main event because it gives people a read order and makes more sense. Thoughts? Thelaststand3 20:23 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I like it, problem lies in whether or not there is a list that can help us sort them. Otherwise we have to sort them by hand. Rau's talk 20:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

We could use marvel.com. Just go to the comic catalog, type in Secret Invasion and all comics involved with it should come up in release date order from the bottom. Thelaststand3 18:02 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It's gonna take some work to get them just right. Also, not all of those carry a banner. Which ones go where?

I tried what I said earlier about going to marvel's catalog and it didn't work because they don't go back far enough to the infiltration which is werid becuase they used to go back years but I found these printable checklsit from marvel.com which show which month they came out in all i have to do is put them in order and that can be done very easily. Once we've done that we can put underneath the announced tie-ins but with no release date. Sound good? Thelaststand3 22:13 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great. Also, Secret Invasion: Spider-Man and Secret Invasion: X-Men were added because that is how i took comments in the interview, if you disagree with the meaning in their words, feel free to remove them when you organize. Also, refs always look nice. Rau's talk 23:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Deceased

Under "Known Impostors", Elektra and Blackbolt have both been marked as "deceased". Now I understand the idea behind it, but I also find it deliberately misleading and confusing to read. The skrulls that were posing as them are deceased, not necessarily who they were posing as; if we must indicate that these impostors have been killed, I would suggest doing so in a way that separates the dead impostor from the (possibly) alive character.FallenSon (talk) 15:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

How about like, Impostor killed in ...such and such.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 18:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I feel that would still be unnecessary and repetitive - the skrull impostors are already listed as being dead in the plot synopsis; and even then, the fate of the impostor is not important in comparison to the fate of the person they were posing as (i.e. we should know that Black Bolt has been replaced with a skrull impostor, we do not need to know that this impostor has been killed - especially after he is said to have died in the plot synopsis).FallenSon (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Known Impostors

• Cyclone - Revealed through dialogue and implications in Captain Marvel #3
• Group of Kree soldiers sent to capture Captain Marvel - Revealed in Captain Marvel #3
• Brother McNally (Church of Hala) - Revealed in Captain Marvel #3

I feel that these three listings need to be listed as each ahs been revealed. Cyclone was said to be a skrull under the same logic that reveal Cobalt Man. The group of Kree soldiers were shown as skrulls, as was Brother McNally. Rau J16 06:08, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if they're said to be a Skrull, they have to be seen and proven. Iron Man said Ms. Marvel was a Skrull but she won't be listed. The other characters are random and not pre-existing so they don't go on either. --Maestro25 (talk) 06:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

And why is that? Impostor is Impostor, it does not say "Pre-Existing characters who have been replaced by Skrulls", it says "Known Impostors". Rau J16 06:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

That's exactly what the section is for, listing the major reveals and characters who have been replaced. It is not for listing every single Skrull that pops up. --Maestro25 (talk) 07:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it is for people who have been revealed as being a Skrull. Rau J16 16:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

• Okay.. my two cents ... firstly Maestro25 states about the kree soldiers and Brother McNally not being pre-existing characters. I don't read Captain Marvel so I won't disagree on that but, The Revolutionary from Liberteens wasn't pre-existing either and under that rationale would need to be removed from the list. How about changing it to "Major Characters Revealed as Imposters" or something. We'd have to remove The Revolutionary but, it would mean we wouldn't have to include "minor" characters at all. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• • Or how about "Named Characters shown to be Imposters". We would then include The Revolutionary and Brother McNally but, not the unnamed soldiers. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• • • Well, with Valentina included the note about superheroes/villians isn't really appropriate anymore. I changed it to "important" characters which to be honest I'm not very happy with either. Can't we just compromise somehow and call it named characters or something? Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Can someone check the Incredible Hercules reveal, I don't read that series. Rau's Speak Page 04:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It's commented that the character's eyes are more green than usual. Not proof by any means. Planewalker Dave (talk) 14:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Possible Impostors?

Could he have a section for Luke cages baby, his wife, Ms. Mavel ext.? People who others have said 'oo they could be a Skrull, o no:O' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.110.148 (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It would be too big, you would have:

• New Avengers
  • Luke Cage
  • Wolverine
  • Doctor Strange
  • Spider-Man
  • Ronin
  • Jessica Jones
  • Danielle Cage
• Mighty Avengers
  • Iron Man
  • Ms. Marvel
  • Spider-Woman
• Captain Marvel
• That guy that attacked Capitan Marvel that one time
• Captain America

see what i mean, and thats just what i could think of off of the top of my head. Rau J16 18:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The Problem: any character within the Marvel Universe could be listed as a "Possible" skrull. And any assumptions you may have about who may or may not be a skrull are yours and yours alone; Wikipedia is supposed to log facts; leave your speculation for the fan boards.FallenSon (talk) 03:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Should Dugan be added in.

I mean we know now that he has been a skrull since the death of cap.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 16:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:BOLD i totally agree, add him. The Placebo Effect (talk) 16:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What about Sue Storm??? She an't on the list niether. She must be a Skrull (referring to her actions in SI#1). Either that or She-Cap and Fury have some mad secret plan and her actions are apart of that mean-destroy Skrull ass plan (But prob the former). Savre (talk) 07:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Never Mind:(Savre (talk) 07:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Daredevil?

Should Daredevil really be confirmed? All we know is that a skrull posed as daredevil to get to Echo, there's no indication whether Matt murdock has been replaced or not yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.14.203 (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• Another sticky one. I'd say not at the moment. Unless it is shown beyond doubt that it wasn't a one time disguise. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

• Bendis indicated on Newsarama that DD was a one-time deal. However, there's no evidence that the Contessa or Sue Richards or indeed Black Bolt were replaced by Skrulls outside of Secret Invasion - in fact, in Sue Richards' case it appears likely that she wasn't, and it was just a "disguise" to get the Skrull into the Baxter Building, given the way the Skrull did it and the comments that she was supposed to be elsewhere in the country - so if those characters are to be included as Skrull Imposters, Daredevil should be too. (Personally I think it would be more efficient to wait until it is revealed which characters were actually replaced, such as Dum Dum - or at least only list characters like Elektra who were in the open field of the Marvel Universe and haven't appeared since the reveal.)MultipleTom (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• • I'm removing the Daredevil reference from the article again in a second. I'm also putting a comment on the anon editor user page about civility for an in appropriate edit summary. Jasynnash2 (talk) 12:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• I'm definitely against suggesting that one-time disguises (Sue, Daredevil) should be mentioned alongside definite long-term replacements for one simple reason. The Skrull that posed as Daredevil was trying to replace Echo. If that happens, either another Skrull would have to re-replace Daredevil or people would wonder where he is. There is also the problem that if Sue Storm had been replaced long-term, the Skrull wouldn't have had to impersonate a tourist in order to gain entry to the Baxter Building. Hermiod (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Spiderman?

I've just removed Spiderman of the New Avengers which was added by an anon user. Could someone confirm if this is fact or just vandalism/speculation? Thanks Jasynnash2 (talk) 12:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

They are going on the fact that Spider-Man, and about half of the other heroes in the universe, came out of a Skrull Ship. Rau's Speak Page 03:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• So not really confirmed (unless dialogue in that issue indicates that the "characters" that came out of the ship are the original persons and not just another event like the "nightcrawler", "thor", etc stuff from the Illuminati event) Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No Fan Talk

Remember that this is not a place for fan-forum type chit-chat. If someone wants to discuss and debate who or who isn't a Skrull, go to Marvel.com, IGN, Wizardworld, or one of the many comic book fora.

• Not sure who wrote the above but, I'd be interested in knowing what they consider to be Fan-Forum chit-chat. The discussion above there comment is about the article and whether to include people or not based on confirmed appearances through the appropriate media. I was trying to confirm whether Spiderman should be included in the article as per previous discussions on this very page about other people/characters. BTW if it was you that placed the comment above please do remember to signoff with the 4 tildes. Thank you. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

He Loves You?

A constant thing that was said before anyone was sabotaged or potentially killed, each person said the lines "He loves you." Shouldnt that play an important part in the summary of this story? Also, what is the significance of that being said? For anyone that has issue 1, take a close look, before Tony Stark was sabotaged, the words were said, before Sue Storm had the Fantastic Four tower engulfed in the N-Zone, the words were said, even all the way at the end when Reed was shot, a shape shifting skrull said "He loves you too." I feel it may play some role that may not be ignored.(Skullguardian videos (talk) 06:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC))

The Dum Dum Dugan Skrull also said this to Dugan after possibly killing him in the online prologue. "Don't worry. He loves you." Jbt1138 (talk) 06:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a story point that will be explained later. Until then it's not very important. --Maestro25 (talk) 06:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think it should be part of the summary, not a big thing just a little mention as of right now. But it is important.-- Phoenix₇₄₁(Talk Page) 15:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The words are not as important as what they are referencing. Wikipedia summaries are supposed to be a brief description of the events - not an in depth look at every issue of the series. The words "He loves you" is not nearly as important as what the words mean, which is yet to be revealed.FallenSon (talk) 03:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, it hasn't been revealed what or who, "He loves you," is referencing (has it ever been used in the past in Marvel?). It does seem very key though. Almost as a way to prove the person is a Skrull that is saying it. To read into it: It kind of seems religious in a modern Battlestar Galactica Cylon sort of way. Cylons believe in one God that loves all, and they infiltrate human culture by disguising themselves as human. It could just mean that their leader actually "loves" the super heroes. Who knows. It is a mystery, and that is why it is there. Something to figure out. Antmusic (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The fact that the meaning behind "He loves you" hasn't been revealed does not make it any less significant in the overall story, and as such there should be at least some mention of it, even in passing. Common sense. DestradoZero 08:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DestradoTensai (talk • contribs)

I agree with Destrado. Although we don't know it's meaning, it still appears to be quite important. Also, didn't the Skrull Princess/Queen say "he loves me" repeatedly in New Avengers #39/40/whatever? Ixistant (talk) 17:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

If we're to go by the usage of the sentence in Ms Marvel #27 and SI #1, then "He loves you" is a codeword for a bomb or something. Since when Dugan and the Ms Marvel Skrull said it the Peak, and the Minicarrier respectively exploded. The only time it hasn't worked like that is in Captain Britain.

MisterXIO (talk)

Danielle Cage

Half Skrull or Full Skrull, she's not a human. She should be on here somewhere...Shouldn't she? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kozmik Pariah (talk • contribs) 00:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Proof of claim. Find a source that states that the kid is a Skrull, or even half of a Skrull(which I dont think is possible). If Jessica is revealed to be a Skrull then she can be added because then her child could not be entirely human, again if that is possible. Rau's Speak Page 01:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Just saying...half-Skrull is possible, as shown by Hulking's heritage. His father was Captain Marvel and his mother was [insert name of Skrull princess here].

definitely revealed, it's in the same issue where elektra is. in fact, solicitations for that issue said "the last page" will be the most important of the year, not elektra's death (which was before the final page... and it's on newsarama. that green coloring wasn't an accident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kozmik Pariah it's also obv important here: http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=116568(talk • contribs) 01:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't jump to conclusions, no matter how reasonable they may seem. There's no reason not to wait for in-story official revelation, and plenty of reasons to wait. We don't insert deductions into these articles. Doczilla _STOMP! 10:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

is hardly jumping to conclusions, but readers'll catch on and gasp and what not in time. I'm mainly saying it should perhaps be mentioned in article, since it's obv important —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.112.77 (talk) 12:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

We do know it's important; we don't know how it's important, nor how important it is. What if Danielle Cage was a Skrull...robot? Or some other alien, witnessing the invasion? What if her eyes are just...naturally green, and it's a complete red herring. The point is, there are a number of conclusions that could be made from this single comic panel; some more reasonable than others, but none proven. Wikipedia is about facts, not speculation. Turn it into a verifiable fact tied to the Invasion - then you can put it in the article. As it stands, you have that she has green eyes...and that it could tie to the Invasion. And even if Jessica Jones is a skrull, this would not necessarily prove that her baby was one - what if the switch took place after the baby was born? All important things to consider before you start speculating.FallenSon (talk) 02:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Right. We don't know when the characters got switched. Luke could have gotten switched after Jessica got pregnant. Doczilla _STOMP! 04:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

This is really stupid, Danielle Cage is not a skrull until either one of her parents is revealed as a skrull or someone comes out and actually says "Hey Luke, Jess, Your kid's a skrull!" - hear say does not belong on wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.169.223 (talk) 01:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Invisible Woman

Richards has been kidnapped like the others, but it happened while she was in Vancouver. A Skrull posing as a spontaneous Mr. Fantastic knocked her out and had her replaced by Lyja. That is why I removed her from the list. It is a similar circumstance to DareDevil. Rau's Speak Page 01:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

No it's not like Daredevil. That Skrull posed as Daredevil for a one time thing only to capture Echo, they haven't actually kidnapped him. On the other hand Invisible Woman was kidnapped, she's been replaced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.168.213 (talk) 05:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone seen the real Daredevil since that Skrull appeared? You only assume that they did not capture him. Rau's Speak Page 17:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Bendis confirmed that the Daredevil Skrull was only a one time thing to capture Echo, otherwise the real Daredevil is okay. And if it were that way that would mean it would be just the same as Hank Pym or Jarvis. Let me dig up the source in question.

And how does this relate to the Invisible Woman being a Skrull? She was captured, Daredevil wasn't which means she was replaced. —Preceding [[Wikip Woman== Could we get a citation on the Secret Invasion: Fantastic Four solits confirming her being a skrull? I just looked over them, and I don't see anything. Am I missing something? Atreyu1075 (talk) 02:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

You arent missing anything. Its OR. Rau's Speak Page 05:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

We don't cite solicitations. See Comics guidelines. Solicitations sometimes lie, solitications can have errors, or story content can change between solicitation and publication. Doczilla _STOMP! 07:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

In the actual comic, a Skrull shifts into Susan's form, then sabotages the Baxter Building. In fact, that's the only 100% clear display of a Skrull impersonating someone in the comic (other than dead-Elektra Skrull). 204.153.84.10 (talk) 21:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Nobody is disputing that a Skrull briefly posed as Sue to infiltrate the Baxter Building. However, this appears to have been a temporary situation as opposed to the more permanent "replacement" of people like Elektra, Dum Dum Dugan and Hank Pym. In these cases, the originals appear to have been killed or kidnapped. The Skrull that posed as Sue may have been drawn in to the Negative Zone with Johnny, Valeria and Franklin. At this point, Johnny does not know that this "Sue" is a Skrull, nor does he know anything about the invasion. If this Skrull had permanently replaced Sue then she would not have had to sneak in to the Baxter Building by posing as a member of a tourist group.

This is a similar situation to the one with Daredevil where the Skrull appeared to only be temporarily posing as a particular individual to carry out a specific task - in Daredevil's case the more permanent replacement of Echo. So, it is likely that the real Daredevil and the real Susan Richards are still on Earth. Hermiod (talk) 11:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It's shown in the preview for SI: Fantastic Four #1 that Sue's subdued/kidnapped by a Skrull posing as Mr Fantastic. That's how they were able to insert Lyja to pose as Sue. Here's the link for the preview for reference. http://comicbookresources.com/?page=preview&id=229&disp=table —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.46.53.132 (talk) 08:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The real Sedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by 67.175.168.213 (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok here's what I was talking about. http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=152226 In it Bendis confirms that the Daredevil Skrull was a one time thing and that he's not been replaced, but he will appear in Secret Invasion. And I don't see how Invisible Woman being captured somewhere else makes it any different then the circumstances that got Elektra and Hank Pym replaced. I'm replacing it and if you can come up with a viable reason rather than opinion that's fine too.

These things you're talking about did not happen in the issue cited. Also cite the issue in which the capture was confirmed. Doczilla _STOMP! 22:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, the point of the mini-series' are so that certain characters can be involved but not have their mains series be affected. If Sue was replaced that would be revealed in the main series, not a limited. Rau's Speak Page 23:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Just because it's in a mini-series that she was captured doesn't make it any less valid than Pym or Jarvis. Does citing it as being in SI:FF make it any better? And Rau is it okay if you actually give a valid reason rather then something unrelated? Saying it's in a mini-series doesn't have anything to do with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.168.213 (talk) 01:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It actually is related. The purpose of the mini-series' are to allow for character reactions to be shown, without disrupting the main series plans. The replacement only happened in the mini-series. There is no proof that the Sue Richards in the main series has been replaced. Therefore, there is no proof that this was not just something to get into the Baxter Building. Rau's Speak Page 01:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

They're IN continuity. Sue Richards was replaced that's all there is to it. Yes they're not to disrupt the main series but I don't see how because the main series's version was not replaced that doesn't make it any less valid. We didn't see when Elektra or Black Bolt got replaced and neither of them have a series. For all we know Black Bolt could've gotten replaced just to take on the Illuminati in #5 but we still added him in so why can't we add Invisible Woman? All I'm asking is if you give a valid reason about it, she got replaced and the Skrull Agents list is supposed to chronicle people who were replaced, just because the Invisible Woman in the main series isn't a Skrull doesn't mean during the time period of SI. And also I believe the current arc takes place before SI since Doctor Strange is shown among the heroes and he's vanished right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.168.213 (talk) 02:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not disputing their continuity. And we don't have any proof on Elektra or Black Bolt either way. And we don't list everyone who has been replaced, that's why this is like Daredevil. It seems like it is a one-off thing. My opinion on this is until she is seen as replaced in the main series, it was a one time thing. Rau's Speak Page 02:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Now I don't get what you mean. Invisible Woman is a prominent character, but we have Revolutionary on that list he's only had one appearance so why don't we take him off? And by main series do you mean the main SI comic or Fantastic Four? The latter is not tying into Secret Invasion so don't expect. And like I said it's not one-off like Daredevil, Daredevil was never captured Invisible Woman was, did you read the article? I don't get why you're so against this. And also it's YOUR opinion as to when it should be replaced, but fact is she was shown captured on-screen so we should reflect that in the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.168.213 (talk) 02:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm against this because you can't prove that she has been replaced. So far we only have proof of her being captured and her being impersonated. But Sue Richards still appears as if she is the real Sue in the Fantastic Four ongoing. If she was actually replaced that would be mentioned in the main series. Kinda hard to skip over that. By the main series I mean the ongoing Fantastic Four series. And I do not even understand the last statement. Rau's Speak Page 02:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

What I meant was it's just your opinion that she hasn't been replaced. And the current FF ongoing isn't going to reflect SI other than Doctor Doom's capture, so that's an impossible checkpoint to reach. I don't get what you mean by captured but not being replaced. She was taken out by a Skrull and Lyja took her place as far as I'm concerned that's grounds for being replaced. I don't see how the method of infiltration Lyja used to get into the Baxter Building makes it any different. MisterXIO (talk) 02:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If she was replaced by a Skrull you think that she would not be in the ongoing series once the Skrull is revealed. And if it doesn't reflect it, then that raises continuity questions. Also, why would Sue Richards need to pose as a tourist to gain entry into the Baxter Building? And yes it is my opinion. That is why we are on the talk page and not the article. We are discussing the improvement of the information within the article, attempting to gain consensus. Once that is established I will follow it gladly. Rau's Speak Page 03:06, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The probable reason why Lyja would need to enter by posing as a tourist is probably not to cause too much attention, but who knows either way. And besides. If I have proof that Mark Millar isn't going to tie in to Secret Invasion can we put her onto the list? And they can't reflect it in the series since that would interrupt Hitch and Millar's run. They're having a SI X-Men mini that takes place after they move to San Francisco doesn't that raise continuity questions like Fantastic Four the same goes for Spider-Man. Both X-Men and Spider-Man are going to reflect on their main comics later on, but like I said Millar doesn't plan on tying into SI so as not to interrupt his stories so this presents a problem for your requirement to do in regards to Invisible Woman. In this situation we should just forget the requirement since it wouldn't work out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterXIO (talk • contribs) 03:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

A tourist sneaking away from the group is draws less attention than a wife coming home from vacation without her husband that will travel across the galaxy at the drop of a hat? Not likely. And I suggest you wait until we get a third opinion on this, as it seems neither of us will budge on the issue. I will not back down when I still have such doubt on the accuracy of her being replaced. Rau's Speak Page 03:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

What exactly is your requirement for her to be replaced? They can't reflect it in the main series so in this case the mini serves that role so I don't see why we can't add her to the list and I don't see why the method of infiltration to the Baxter Building matters. Besides she only got captured just before SI so we know when she got replaced.MisterXIO (talk) 03:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I also found this

MM: Yes, we tie in directly with New Avengers and Secret Invasion. Not with the Skrulls, but we're both using Doom and what Brian (Bendis) does with Doom feeds directly into issue #558 and then what we do feeds into the end of Secret Invasion. Once Secret Invasion is done, we have Doom back and it's the biggest shock of them all. I love the idea of a cohesive Marvel Universe. Not where we're finishing each other's stories (which is horrible), but where we loan out characters and having everything threaded together. http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=151733 MisterXIO (talk) 03:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Kay, kay. I still don't think she's been replaced but I'll drop it for now. If a third person brings it up though, you can expect I'll back them. Rau's Speak Page 03:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, I'd tend to side with MisterXIO. The only question is when exactly is Susan's capture take place? Does it take place years ago or rather recently? Also, just because Susan being a Skrull is not addressed in the main series doesn't mean that she isn't one. Millar might just wish to not bother with the whole Skrull business and his story might thus take before the Invasion or after the Invasion. If it takes place before the Invasion arc (which might be likely given the volume of heroes who attack that CAP robot), why would Miller mention it? Susan/Laja would still be in hiding and would fully help her team while waiting for the signal. If the current story in the main series takes place after the Invasion, again, why would Miller mention it in the first few issues. It's like, they're battling a giant robot and you expect them to say something like "Oh, by the way, aren't we lucky we survived that whole Skrull thing. Yeah, lucky. Let's get back to not being killed by the robot." I don't think so. The point is, however, that no mention of Susan being a Skrull is not evidence of her not being a Skrull. On the other hand, clear evidence of her being replaced in that hotel room is in fact clear evidence of her being a Skrull. I don't really see how evidence from a clearly labeled Invasion Mini can be outweighed by lack of mention in the current story arc from the Main series (a story arc that I think started before or right at the start of the Invasion arc). Lack of evidence in one series doesn't outweight presence of evidence in the other. --RossF18 (talk) 02:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. And actually what you said is true though here's a coupla things to know.

1 The reason why the SI mini was done was because Millar and Hitch didn't want to divide their run tying in to SI. 2 The current arc takes place before Secret Invasion which is confirmed since Millar said the Doom story takes place after his defeat in Mighty Avengers and what he does with him feeds into the end of SI. 3 Invisible Woman was only replaced a little bit before the invasion started and the Baxter Building being shunted into the Negative Zone, this is confirmed by Johnny telling her that Reed went with Pym which is when SI#1 takes place with Stark, Richards, and Pym overlooking the Skrull body.MisterXIO (talk)

When did Johnny tell Susan that Reed went with Pym? On the phone when she was on her way to the hotel room or when she was about to reveal herself as a Skrull? If Johnny tells Susan about Reed on the phone as she walks to the hotel room in which the Reed Skrull is, then I must have missed that and yes, that would make the change a very short time thing and likely just to get her out of the way as opposed to a true replacement. If Johnny tells Susan about Reed after she already initiated the Negative Zone portal, then, I don't see how Johnny telling her that would mean that the hotel scene takes place relatively recently. --RossF18 (talk) 05:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

It's on the first page of the prologue in SI:FF#1. He says: "Who am I? My brother-in-law's keeper? He got that look in his eyes--you know that "don't-talk-to-me-I'm-solving-the-worlds-problems-and-basically-your-a-gnat" look--and took off. I think with Henry Pym maybe-." Then Ben cuts him off about making food. Rau's Speak Page 17:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Susan's capture takes place the same day as the invasion or very near it, so I don't see how she was replace at all. in the mini, after the prologue, it state that the explosion incident that takes the Baxter Building into the negative zone happened LATER. Not a month later, nor a year later, nor a week later, just later. They didn't make it vague. It happens quite soon. Hence Johnny asking the poser why isn't she on her trip.. where the real one was. Susan was not replace, or the Lyja wouldn't have had to pass as a tourist to enter the building. She would've been there already. Susan doesn't belong on that list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12alex05 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The reason Lyja probably had to pose as a tourist was so as not to cause a ruckus people to go around to her asking "Why aren't you in Vancouver" since it seemed to be a pretty well known trip she was on. Since she was captured by the Skrulls and someone is taking her identity I'd say that fits quite well under the Skrull Imposter list. And it's already been shown in SI: FF anyways that she's been captured, what more do you need? MisterXIO (talk)

Trying to Stop a Revert War Before It Starts

The use of English in this revision was not good so that's why I edited it. For instance, it used Agent Brand's full name and title twice within as many sentences and broke the general no digits in written English rule (you should always write 'one' instead of '1' and 'fifty five' instead of '55'). Hermiod (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Okay on the digits thing, maybe I'm just old or my education is somehow out of date but, I was always taught it should be zero through nine and then when in double digits or more it was okay (and sometimes preferred) to use numbers. I think your comments on the Agent Brand thing is valid though. Jasynnash2 (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I won't argue the toss about the numbers thing as the number in question was one. :-) Hermiod (talk) 12:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

:o) Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Home Invasion

Shouldn't the events of the online "Home Invasion" story that Marvel has going on at their homepage be a part of this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyrocket (talk • contribs) 22:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It should. At the very least, it should be included in the Secret Invasion tie-in section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.64.152 (talk) 02:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Alternate Comic Covers mention in Production and Marketing?

Didn't see a mention of this, but Marvel has some relatively rare cover variants for many of their issues with a Skrull theme. Generally the character appears with green skin. There is more info here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2314352&page=0&fpart=1 I imagine this would garner at least a mention in the Production and Marketing bit? -Kraw Night (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea, this is true. I got a version of Young X-men where Cyclops has a Skrull face. Skrull Variant Covers, agree that there should be a mention of this advertising campaign somewhere in the article. Savre (talk) 05:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Length of Infiltration

I believe we should keep any discussion (referenced, of course, and NOT speculation) of how long a character has been a Skrull operative to that individual character's own entry to save from bloating this article unnecessary. Hermiod (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

DEADPOOL!!!

Just bringing this here, Deadpool #1 will be a Secret Invasion tie-in. It comes out in August. It is properly sourced and placed. Please do not remove it, check the source if you have doubts.

Super Skrulls

Why are the Skrulls that appear in SI #2 listed as Warskrulls? Bendis and other writers have stated that they're the new model of Super Skull not Warskrulls. I guess they're interchangeable but I just thought you might want to know this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.46.53.132 (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I edited it into the article myself if any of you wishes to change it that's fine. 12.46.53.132 (talk)

Warskrulls are created when the Skrulls go through a special process using a template individual which allows them to copy one individuals appearence and powers (rather than just appearence), so for example Blackbolt would have been a Warskrull. Superskrulls are Skrulls with multiple powers as seen at the end of SI #2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.77.52 (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I think the Blackbolt Skrull that appeared in Illuminati was supposed to be an Illuminati Skrull since it had telepathy and stretching abilities

Franklin Richards

Is this 'real funny' ittle issue gonna get a mention. I mean really, he is/was a skrull (heh).

ALSO, THERE ARE SKRULLS IN THE YOUNG AVENGERS. AT the end of secret invasion 2 the hint is super obviuous. There prob wouldnt be a need for further conmfirmation.

Just saying. Savre (talk) 01:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Um, of course there is a Skrull in the Young Avengers, that's common knowledge. As for Franklin Richards, what are you talking about? What issue? Rau's Speak Page 01:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Half-Skrull actually. But not a known Skrull agent. I think Savre is goofing around. Doczilla _STOMP! 02:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

MI:13

I don't know how important this is to the main story but there's two things in the premiere issue of Captain Britain and MI:13 that might be worth pointing out. One is that Sir Mortimer Grimsdale is revealed as a skrull on page 3 when Pete tears him up. I only know of Grimsdale from his appearances in the Wisdom MAX title, don't know if he qualifies as important enough. Second, a skrull warship launches a missile at the UK from orbit, intending to destroy the Siege Perilous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedumbring (talk • contribs) 17:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Invasion section

The Invasion section is going to get huge if it covers every SI tie-in that comes out. The rest of the plot section is big enough as it is. I would recommend leaving only the truly essential info in, which right now should be mostly what Bendis is writng. Other plot points can be included in their specific articles. What do you guys think? --Maestro25 (talk) 23:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

What I'm thinking is that we wait until the entire event is over, that way we know what is important and can condense it then. This might not be ideal now, but It seems to be the best solution to me. Rau's Speak Page 23:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should continue updating it with new information. Irrelevant information can easily be taken out, and once the SI is over then we can work on the best synopsis of the events. That way we have a clear outline for the synopsis section. Ixistant (talk) 16:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thunderbolts

When did Khn'nr attack the Thunderbolts? I thought that hadn't happened yet? Rau's Speak Page 02:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it is in Secret Invasion one when "Captain Marvel" attacks Thunderbolts mountain. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering what he was doing.... Rau's Speak Page 22:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Tie-ins/checklist

Last night the tie-ins section was reconfigured to be a more compact list of titles and runs rather than a checklist-style list broken down by months. It took a bit to put the links and references back in and then that was all reverted [1]. I've put it back for now but thought it worth discussing.

Personally I don't really think we need a full check list - if it is important then someone somewhere will have already produced one and we can link to that. (Emperor (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC))

• I agree we don't need a complete "checklist" that is something better maintained by Marvel. I think the "final" article may need a "highlights" checklist of somesort where the important definining events that occured are listed though. This list can include confirmed and crucial "foreshadowing" of the event. Unfortunately, it is not something that we can sufficiently write while the storyline is ongoing. Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Captain America

He's been added to known skrull list. Can this be clarified in someway. Particularly as a whole bunch of characters came out of the ship in #1. Is there someway we can perhaps delay placing things in these articles to avoid spoilers for those of us that want to be useful to the project but, don't want our reading hobby destroyed simply cause we hadn't gotten around to buying an issue until tomorrow? Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I simply avoid the article until I have read the issue. But to my knowledge the only Skrull that has replaced Steve is the one that came out of the ship. Rau's Speak Page 18:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Spider-Woman

Mighty Avengers #13 appears to confirm that Jessica Drew is the Skrull Queen. So what should we do, add her in or leave her out? Ixistant (talk) 17:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Mighty Avengers #13 says nothing about Jessica Drew or the Skrull Queen. You are thinking New Avengers #40, and that issue only mentions the intention to replace her. Actually assuming that she has been is speculation. Rau's Speak Page 18:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. It's Mighty Avengers #14 that has the reference. In that, Jessica Drew is seen asking if they have to wear costumes while at a party of Avengers members. Later on, the same character is seen at a gathering of Skrull agents, being called 'Emperess' by the Jarvis Skrull and complaining that she has to sleep in the same building as The Sentry. Any more proof needed? Ixistant (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I just read the issue. I know what you are talking about now. I need no further proof. Rau's Speak Page 19:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll say it now: I'm betting it will turn out to be the real Jessica who has infiltrated the Skrulls but isn't completely sure which of her fellow heroes to trust. I certainly would not introduce such speculation into the article. I mention it here only to point out that people need to be more careful in their wording. Listing her as a confirmed Skrull agent is fine because that would remain true even if she triple-crosses them. We need to do our best to let the plain facts speak for themselves. Saying that they called her Empress is accurate. The basics of storytelling mean that Bendis must make readers think someone has been replaced when they actually have not. Doczilla _STOMP! 02:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Cold Edit War

There seems to be a peaceful edit war that has spanned the last few weeks over the capitalization of "revealed" in the Skrull list. It is not unconstructive, simply there. A consensus would resolve this. Rau's Speak Page 23:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

My vote is for having a lower case 'r'. It just looks better Ixistant (talk) 10:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Lower case. Doczilla _STOMP! 17:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Wait, are we just voting? I was kind of hoping there would already be an answer. Oh, well. I vote lower as per above. Rau's Speak Page 18:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Impostor List

Can we change the imposter list on the page by cutting back on characters? I don't think one appearance characters like Revolutionary or minor villains like Cobalt Man have a place on a list that's supposedly for major or prominent characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterXIO (talk • contribs) 02:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I cut it down. But they will no doubt be added back soon enough. Rau's Speak Page 03:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright cool, thanks man. Do you think maybe we should present a rationale for it just in case? If we have a list for every Skrull replacement the list may fill up as the series goes on. MisterXIO (talk) 03:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Haha, funny you should say that: see this. You hit the nail on the head with it in one. That's why it says prominent. The B-List characters don't really need mentions. Rau's Speak Page 03:43, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I believe B-list characters, specially if they are superhumans, deserve mentions.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 14:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah if we do that than the list is going to be too large. Captain Marvel isn't A-List but he still gets a mention, the thing is these characters either have to be A-List or have to be important to the plot to get a mention IMO. Or else the criteria will be too easy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterXIO (talk • contribs) 03:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Yea but he's Captain Marvel- er, sort of. He also had a mini-series exploring whether or not he is a Skrull. I think that much focus should qualify him for the list. But yes, I think that those are good requirements. But how do we judge midway through an event who is important or not? We can't. If we do it like that, we end up waiting until November/December. Rau's Speak Page 04:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Importance level

Phil's right. A current hot topic series merits more than bottom importance. Doczilla _STOMP! 01:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep - as the issue effects a number of articles I raised this here: User talk:Hiding#Bottom class. (Emperor (talk) 02:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC))

As I said there, if people want to reassess, reassess. I am merely one man. Hiding T 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Spider-Woman Needs to be removed from the list of confirmed Skrulls

So everyone is going crazy and jumping to conclusions instead of thinking things through rationally. The Skrull impersonators meeting from Mighty Avengers #14 has taken place AFTER the Civil War (Skrull-Jarvis: "We have decided to let the Hulk situation and the registration act situation come to a boil and do our work for us...") however, since Skrullektra is still alive, we know that this meeting occurs sometime before Jessica Drew leaves the renegade Avengers team. This means that Jessica is not yet with Tony Stark's Avengers team at this point in time yet. Anyone jumping to the conclusion that it is a Jessica imposter saying "I can't believe I have to sleep in the same building with him" is therefore wrong, Jessica is not yet with the Mighty team and would not be sleeping in the same building with Robert yet. All we know is that a brunette woman in Avengers Tower is being impersonated by a Skrull (after all, we don't know what this artist's drawing of Jessica should look like); this could be Janet Van Dyne or Lindy Reynolds. It is my firm belief that Spider-Woman is being used as a red herring to give the reader a greater shock when Janet (for example) is revealed as a Skrull (possibly the Queen). I don't have an online reference, but those of you who have the Avengers Disassembled trade paperback can verify this from the interview at the back: Mr Bendis has stated that he will never engage himself in a crossover/event wherein readers are obligated to pick up any extra titles to follow the story he's writing, one would think that would include revealing a major player like Jessica Drew has been a Skrull all along in a book outside of the Secret Invasion title without bringing it up in the main title. He also has made it clear that the seeds have been planted since Avengers Disassembled, a story wherein I was surprised to discover that he had indeed been laying out clues; for instance, I'm pretty sure Janet's a skrull due to Hank being confused by her not growing back to normal size after being knocked unconscious as well as her triggering Wanda's breakdown (similar to the Skrull's technique of driving the Sentry insane to eliminate the threat he poses). However, no matter how strongly I believe in this theory that she is a Skrull, Wikipedia is not the place to be listing her as one. So until we get definitive proof that Jessica Drew is a Skrull apart from there being a brunette woman at the meeting and the Skrull Queen showing an interest in impersonating her, we have to remove her from the list for now, it is our duty to be objective when writing these articles but we also have to use rational sense: using logic does not go against wikipedia policies, jumping to conclusions based on a writer's clever writing techniques does. Thank you, I hope this doesn't cause an unnecessary argument, I'm not used to posting, I usually leave these things to the professionals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.158.152.207 (talk) 08:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Asief (talk) 08:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)asief

It's not a list of confirmed Skrulls. It's a list of confirmed Skrull agents. She has been shown to be a Skrull agent, even if it turns out to be the real Jessica who turns on the Skrulls. A double- or triple-agent is still an agent. (I haven't read the issue, but except for you, everyone else who read it says that's Jessica.) Doczilla _STOMP! 08:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

well it's clearly not her if you look at the timing. Jessica is still with Luke Cage's team at the time of the meeting

(which means she wouldn't be sleeping in the same buildind as Robert)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Asief (talk • contribs) 

Please learn how to sign your posts. Doczilla _STOMP! 08:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

It's supposed to be four "~" right? Coz that's what I've been doing and it's going gaga like this. Like I said, I'm not used to posting —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asief (talk • contribs) 08:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

It's before the Civil War. They discuss how the Civil War and World War Hulk will affect Sentry. The scene where she complains about her costume is the day that they are going public about being Avengers. You can find the same scene in New Avengers #15. That same woman is later called "empress." At the time of New Avengers #15, Spider-Woman was the only female on the team. She is the only one who would need to be in costume. Wasp was not even present. Rau's Speak Page 22:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

That's right. The Skrull Empress wouldn't just pose as a random brunette. And Jessica Drew was the only woman on the team at the time so who else would it be?

And where did you get the idea that this was after World War Hulk? It doesn't even show a timeskip between the Avengers meeting and the Skrull meeting which indicates it took place within the same day. MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

• Okay not touching the article space but, at no point in the issue (I finally got around to reading it) does it show the person to definitely be Jessica Drew. The facts seem to support the possibility of it being Jessica Jones. Jasynnash2 (talk) 07:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is the issue does not say she is a skrull so it was a lie to say it did.LifeStroke420 (talk) 13:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Read the name of the list. It does not say confirmed Skrulls. It says Skrull agents. Not the same thing. Doczilla _STOMP! 19:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep CONFIRMED being the most important word. There is no confirmation that the person is Jessica Drew. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

In which case we cannot name her. In fact, all these people who think she's Jessica when so many aren't sure just makes me even more certain that Jessica is really Jessica. (I wish I'd seen that issue.) Doczilla _STOMP! 09:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It is Jessica. There are enough facts to support that it is her. The people who have doubt simply don't read the facts. Rau's Speak Page 22:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

There's no confirmation? She's wearing the same clothes as Jessica Drew, she says she sleeps under the same roof as the Sentry, why yes she's obviously not Jessica Drew. Nope no facts to support that must be fanboy opinion. But speaking seriously I've got to go with Rau. MisterXIO (talk)

C'mon. You've read comic books before. You've watched movies (Bendis thinks cinematically). If there's a way to mess with you and make you think it's one character when it's not, that's a reasonable thing for the writer to do. Clothes do not the woman make. Doczilla _STOMP! 05:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Unless there was another brunette in the same outfit as Jessica in Avengers Tower that day, all facts point to it being her. Rau's Speak Page 05:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

No matter how obvious that may seem to be, it's an inference. The mere fact that people are debating it means it's not clearcut enough for inclusion. Doczilla _STOMP! 05:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC) Come to think of it, neither of us added a darn thing to this discussion with these last two redundant statements. Doczilla _STOMP! 05:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

But it is. It is obviously her. The facts I provided support it well enough. No one has even contradicted them. And clothes do not make the woman, but there only being one brunette superhero in that room is enough evidence. And the evidence says: Jessica Drew. Rau's Speak Page 06:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, given Secret Invasion #3, I think it's very safe to say that Spider-Woman is indeed Veranke. Droorogers (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary

We need to trim the plot summary. Is it really realistic to add every tie-in story into the summary from Guardians of the Galaxy to Captain Britain? We should pare it down to stuff that Bendis has written, or at least relegate it to seperate pages or keep the summaries in the characters respective books. MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Guardians of the Galaxy isn't even involved in the invasion. They are all of doing their own thing, just like NOVA. And I just figured we'd wait until it was over, then summarize. Rau's Speak Page 18:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually isn't Nova getting involved in the Invasion? He's heading back to earth and according to DNA the Skrulls try to assassinate him and that's how he becomes involved. Guardians of the Galaxy are sort of involved since the Skrulls try to use Knowhere as a checkpoint and attack the Guardians. MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm referring to now. Nova will be involved by late summer. And when did the Skrulls use Knowhere as a checkpoint and attack them? Rau's Speak Page 00:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Wait a second, the article doesn't have any information on the Guardians at all. They don't even tie-in until #4. I feel this part of the conversation is irrelevant. Rau's Speak Page 00:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't refering to right now. I was using the Guardians of the Galaxy as an example. What I meant was we can't just add the plot of every story that'll tie-in or else it'll become enormous, and as for when the Skrulls use Knowhere as a checkpoint, that'll be in the tie ins this summer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.245.47 (talk) 17:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, kay. Well, I still think that waiting until it is over, and then removing all but the important stuff will work best right now. Other wise, we will be constantly rewriting this article. And until then, it might actually be beneficial to the us if all of the information is mentioned in at least an organized way. That way the information will be there when it gets condensed. And as someone who has condensed plot summaries of quite a few articles, having all of the information right there is extremely helpful when condensing. Rau's Speak Page 18:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It is really, really, long. Wouldn't it better to have sections to summarise what happens in each part of the story? A synopsis for the main series is fine, and then descriptions of all the tie-ins. Alientraveller (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I think we should remove all tie-in information outright. I'm looking at the article, and it is ridiculous. I never expected it to be like this. I think a summarization of what's happened in the main series should suffice for now. Bendis stated that the series was written in a way that you didn't need to read any of the tie-ins to understand what is going on, that should hold true for a summary as well. Thoughts? Rau's Speak Page 03:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Depends on whether we are speaking of Secret Invasion (comic) or Secret Invasion (storyline) to me. If we are speaking of this particular series than the tie ins don't belong. If we are speaking of the storyline than brief mentions of tie-ins could be allowed (specifically for replacements and such but, that is the sort of content that should be done at the end and not inserted everytime a new book comes out). Just my 2 cents. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I personally was referring to the comic. The storyline should be done afterwards. I feel a condensed version of the first three issues should be in the plot section now. With only the important things being added as a new issue comes out. Rau's Speak Page 10:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree that we should just cover the events in the actual SI issues. Other articles can cover the rest. Skyrocket (talk) 1:21 27, June 2008

Iron Man

I really think he should be left off the "confirmed agents" list until we actually see that he's a Skrull. Otherwise it could all be taken as just a ploy to make him paranoid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.8.51 (talk) 06:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

You are right. He does not belong. Rau's Speak Page 23:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, not yet, if ever. We'll see. I'll third. --RossF18 (talk) 00:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Marvel and Bendis have confirmed before in interviews Iron Man is not a Skrull so we don't need to worry about that. MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

They could have been lying. Rau's Speak Page 02:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Even if they were the bit in Secret Invasion #3 doesn't prove anything. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Not saying he does. Rau's Speak Page 15:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

How do you know they're lying? There's no reason to do it and it's just plain douchey. Bendis and Marvel have sworn up and down they're not lying about it because it would ruin alot of character development the character has received and it would take away the gravity of the ending of Civil War with Iron Man taking control of S.H.I.E.L.D and starting the Initiative. And I don't think they'd reveal a character who has two comics centered around him as a Skrull. And besides it's pretty easy to see it's just Veranke's way of screwing with his head. MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I never said they were, I said that they could be lying. And it would make the reveal all that more surprising. Rau's Speak Page 23:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Secret Invasion motivation

In the production and marketing section it should be altered to say that the motivation isn't Annihlation. Also there's a bit of error saying it's been seeded since NA#1 since Bendis has confirmed that the Skrull plot has been seeded since Avengers Disassembled, there's even confirmation that he's doing an issue going back to House of M and showing how the Skrulls were involved there. Now if I'm wrong about this in someway or another please correct me.MisterXIO (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok I still really think we need to remove the one-off Initiative members from the Skrull List. It should really be more or less essential characters within the story rather than characters who appeared once or twice like Magnitude or Revolutionary or aren't that important like Colbalt Man. If we go this way we're probably going to have alot of Skrulls. MisterXIO (talk)

These little one off characters might become major players as the series wears on. But if you want to remove them, I won't stop you. And for your last comment. Annihilation added to the resolve, it added additional motivation. And Hound of M takes place after The New Avengers #1. Rau's Speak Page 04:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think all the actual reveals should be left in until the event is over. Then we can see which ones were important to the overall story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.21.64 (talk) 03:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Secret Warriors

I've made a page for the Secret Warriors (they are gettin their own series soon, making them notable. Any help on improving it would be helpful.Black Dalek (talk) 10:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)