Talk:X-Men

Reflecting social issues

I keep trying to insert the correlation between mutant supremacists like Magneto/Xorn and the Omega Gang with racial supremacists (especially Hitler) and their concepts of "racial superiority" because I believe it's relevant to the article's section on "Reflecting social issues" as part of the X-Men's message on the virtue of tolerance (as the other issues above it are) Yet, somebody seems to always come from behind and delete it right after me. I'd just like to know why. I feel like it's important to note amidst the other points of the section. If somebody has a valid reason for always getting rid of it, I'd really like to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.114.188.153 (talk) 02:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The Supremacism stuff is original research, and it's debatable.

It's different to say "The X-Men are a metaphor for persecuted minorities" and "The X-Men are a metaphor for Adolf Hitler." (Furthermore, most of the characters you listed are more like Malcom X than Adolf Hitler in that they're persecuted minorities who are hostile to the majority, whereas Hitler was a member of the majority who persecuted minorities). I mean, if you want to add something to the Racism section comparing the Brotherhood to militant groups like the Black Panthers, be my guest.

As for Sinister and Apocalypse; Sinister isn't like Magneto or Mystique, in that they want to make the world better for mutants. Remember, he was responsible for the Morlock Massacre. And Apocalypse's "Survival of the fittest" views extends to everyone. It wasn't like Age of Apocalypse was a paradise for mutants. --DrBat (talk) 15:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

But the other points in the section could classify as "original research" as well. There's no citations for the Legacy Virus as a metaphor for AIDS. I made reference to Planet X as an example. Morrison specifically made the Hitler parallel. Magneto's ideology goes beyond just Malcolm X-type rhetoric in that he believes he is the next step in Darwinian evolution and that humans, rather than being simple oppressors, are genetically inferior to mutants, similar to Hitler's views between "Aryans" and Jews.. By the same token, we should take out "Red Scare" because the parallel between Kelly's "list" speech and McCarthyism are without citations and simply implied.

And my point with Apocalypse and Sinister wasn't that they were mutants' best friends but that they found mutants genetically superior to normal humans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.114.189.168 (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The only serious parallel Magneto had to Hitler (Planet X) was a horrible story that quickly retconned.

Magneto has never shown anything but love for his human granddaughter Luna, he named a part of Genosha after his human wife, Magda. Ect, ect ect. He just believes that if mutants are not in control, the humans will wipe them out. --DrBat (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Magneto is consistently being portrayed as a metaphor for Hitler. Xavier tells him time and again that his choice of methods are causeing him to become that which he hates. See, e.g., X-Men (2nd Series) #1-3, UCX #150, UNX #200, etc. One of the critical aspects of the character is that as a reaction to his experience in the death camps, he has developed a philosophy of mutant supremacy that is analagous to the judeophobia of Nazi Germany. It's part of what makes his character so powerful -- that he can both be a victim and a sympathetic person, and "evil" in a very real sense of the word. It's clear as day that Claremont wanted that to be known, as when Magneto almost killed a young Kitty Pryde in issue #150, but saw the Star of David she wore and realized that he was becoming what he hated most. 76.229.162.110 (talk) 22:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

otheruses is getting out of hand, how about X-Men (2000 film)?

I've seen other titles on wikipedia adding the year date inside the disambiguation section, this seems like a good idea here. The more clear and specific an article's title the less need there is for an unwieldy otherusers template at the top of the article. Note: this increased movie title disambiguation specificity discussion started at: Talk:The X-Files (film) about whether to rename that article to The X-Files (Fight the Future) which is that movie's subtitle/nickname/working title or whether to rename it to The X-Files (1998 film) or neither (there is a second X-Files film scheduled for release July 25, 2008 titled The X-Files: I Want to Believe). Convergence Dude (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no such thing as X-men: Dimensions novels!

I searched around the internet and through Marvel's own catalog of products and there is no proof that something like X-men Dimensions exist. If anyone can proof it's existance as official legitimated Novel produced by Marvel, i'm okay with it. But if not, i would like to see it removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.6.232.115 (talk) 15:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I can't find anything either, and the second hit on google is for a forum where they are trying to figure out if it's a hoax or not, so I'm being bold and removing it. If there's a source I missed, please feel free to add it back in. Templarion (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Article image

I've removed the image "giantsize1.jpg" because it is a varied form of the X-Men team. The image I've added right now actually features a cover of the X-Men that is clear, definate and modern - it's also an Uncanny cover, a part of the core X-Men series. -- A ^talk/_contribs 00:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm unsure about that. We should be reflecting a classic line-up and avoiding new-for-the-sake-of-new images. The Giant Size X-Men being an important issue as it showed the new team but it also showed the old one too. I'd rather we kept that one personally. (Emperor (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC))

Yikes, sorry for the longest reply - this page isn't on my watchlist yet. Well, I see what your getting at. But if it's portraying the classic (but varied) X-Men, shouldn't it be (at the very least) moved to the main body of the article? I'm not one for new-for-the-sake-of-new-type images, but it seems (to me) more like a "publication history" image, rather than a modern image to visual the members of a team. -- A ^talk/_contribs 22:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Publication history

I've tried to go about making a timeline to make the (core) titles easier to understand. I've run into some readability problems. Anyone who's a template wizard willing to help out?

This book is the highest selling book in comic book history (selling close to 8 million copies)

This is not the first time I came across this statement about the first copy of the 90s edition of X-Men. This statement is false. How can a book be the highest selling book in history with 8 millions when the Asterix series, to take the most popular European series, has sold 325 millions copies with 34 books, making an average over 9 millions per book. I suspect that the Dragon Ball series (a Japan magan) also have some books over the 8 million mark (its average is over 6 millions) (see Wikipedia articles on Asterix and Dragon Ball for sources). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.244.181 (talk) 07:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Listen up you fucking fanboys

This article is a comic book and as such does not belong in an encyclopedia. I hate everyone who has ever edited this article. I hope everyone they love rejects them, I hope every insititution they believe in is destroyed, I hope that they realize on their death beds that every decision in their life was wrong and they die with regret.