Talk:Wolverine (character)/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This archive covers a dispute in July 2005 regarding the "Powers and abilities" section. -- Netoholic @ 17:35, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

SUPER STRENGTH It's very clear that Wolverine does not have super-strength. Anyone of any intelligence has admitted that Wolverine is at best able to lift a breadbox, let alone the rubbishbin. Under an optimal situation he has also been known to be able to slice bread without much trouble, and carve the turkey for thanks givings.

Strength Level Links

1) The official entry from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Issue 4:

2) The official index from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe as included with Issue 2: (just the strength part).jpg

3) Wolverine breaking steel bonds with his bare hands from X-Men 111:

4) Wolverine lifting at least 6 men over his head in Wolverine Volume 2, Issue 1.

5) Narrator stating that Wolverine has enhanced strength in New Invaders 6.

6) Wolverine stating that he has enhanced strength in New X-Men: Academy, Issue 10.

7) The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Wolverine 2004 last page with strength level of character on it. Strength level of character is level 4. (just the strength part)

8) The Index for all Official Handbooks of the Marvel Universe 2004 and 2005 (just the power levels part).

9) The Official Marvel Universe Entry for Wolverine on the Marvel Universe with Wolverine's strength level pointed out.

10) Wolverine breaking steel or iron chains yet again in Wolverine: Black Rio.

None of these images were fabricated.

(unsigned, left by User:Britney Spears on 06:49, 9 July 2005)

In the first place, you do not know what I am thinking. You merely assume what I’m thinking, and pretend that the assumption is a fact. You have never asked me what my thoughts are on any given subject, as it has been your preference to attack me and insult me. I do not think that stating something in three paragraphs is more “sophisticated” or “intelligent” than doing so in one, and have never said that I did. I have explained why I do think that my more-detailed entry on his powers is appropriate, and you have simply misrepresented it, as your invective about what I “think” is just a Straw Man argument on your part. Your assertion that I have attempted to make one side of the issue sound intelligent but distorted or omitted information for the other is also false, and you have not provided examples of where I’ve done this. As for an encyclopedia not being the place to state my opinion, I agree. This is why I have not done so. (Indeed, much of my small contributions to other articles has been to improve inexact wording or fix wording that is not reflective of NPOV.) I have simply addressed the issue of Wolvie’s strength, and provided the information that people who disagree on it point to. Not simply my own opinion. To refer to this as simply illustrating my own opinion is a simplistic distortion so blatant that it functions as a lie—quite interesting, given that accusations you level at me of “distortion”, which you never elaborate. An encyclopedia is most certainly the place for information, and since the issue of Wolverine’s strength is seen differently by different people, it is appropriate to mention it in an entry for the character, regardless of whether you think it is irrelevant. Your apparent position, that the entry should not mention his strength ‘’at all’’, is without merit. Reference sources should exhibit a certain modicum of detail. Not vagueness. Your accusation that I am deliberately trying to annoy anyone is also unsupported, and also irrelevant. The fact is, you do not know what my intentions are, and any viewing of my contributions to other articles shows that they are made in sincerity and good faith, and not with the intention of annoying anyone. The fact that you end up feeling annoyed doesn’t mean that it is my deliberate intention to do so, a distinction that you seem to be having trouble making, to say nothing of your inability to hold a civil discussion with someone you disagree with. It is interesting that I “won’t engage in discussion with you here”? How so? No one asked me to come here for a discussion, which I why I’ve so far conducted discussions on this matter on my own Talk page and on yours, a fact that you conveniently omit (yet another curiosity, given your own accusations against me of omission). The discussion here has only been going for four days, before which no one was discussing the matter here, and now, having just discovered the discussion here, here I am. So what? I have explained my actions to you more than once, and rather than successfully refute anything I’ve said, your own response has been to employ Straw Man arguments and insults. Nightscream July 12, 2005; 1:03am EST.

Ummmm... You are aware that you just responded to the wrong person, right??? That jumble of nonsense up there is really rude and incoherent. I'm not making fun of you either, but you really need to calm down and try to be a little more mature. ScifiterX 07:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Ummmm... Try and respond up top where everybody else is talking. You aren't making a lot of sense. You really need to calm down and try to be just little more mature, you are coming off as quite hostile. ScifiterX 07:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Nightscream speaks

This is copied from my (ScifiterX) talk page.

"Call it like I see it" does not constitute reasoning, or a cogent argument. I have responded to your accusations and other statements by explaining why they don't hold up, pointing out your manipulation and distortion of words and their meanings, your unnecessary insults, and so forth. What you refer to as your logic is actually paralogia, and merely asserting that it is sound, or that I have done what you accused me of doesn't make it true. I have refuted your statements by showing why they are false, and you have been unable or wiling to do the same, preferring to respond only with rhetoric. I have pointed out that you have not provided reasoing or examples to support your accusations, which is simply true. Your statement that I have been doing what you said I did is a prime example. I made a statement about how an article being long has nothing to do with whether it makes sense. This is a reasonable statement. Yet you reply with a non-sequitur about what I've done. What exactly is that? You never elaborate on these comments, which makes them nothing more than rhetorical. Rhetoric and Argument by Fiat is veridically invalid, and does not validate your position. Nightscream 7.12.05. 7.12.05. 1:46am EST.

Wow, looks like somebody was busy with their dictionary tonight. I read this to two of my friends and they were just about rolling on the floor laughing. "Your logic is actually paralogia." "Rhetoric and Argument by Fiat is veridically invalid." How can I read that with a straight face? I mean really, I have never insulted the guy. But, he is being a nuisance and now he leaves me these little gems on my talk page. I see a new one just about every time I log in. Is he doing this because he craves attention or something? ScifiterX 07:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

This is also copied from my (ScifiterX) talk page.

Here is one where he isn't just insulting me:

Shocking as it may be to you, I know that others have been reverting the entry. So what? Most of them employ the same sort of Straw Men, word manipulation and other fallacies that you do, as well as irrelevant insults and name-calling, none of which I tend to take very seriously. If you want to engage in a civil discussion in which I might see your point of view, you might consider abandoning those tactics, since they do nothing to lend credence to your position, much less convince me. Nightscream 7.12.05. 7.12.05.

???? say wha??ScifiterX 08:01, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Questionable statements

Before I start I'd like to express my own opinion on this. Some writers clearly write Wolverine with moderately superhuman strength (about a 10th of what Spiderman has); sufficient strength to break out of a flimsy jail cell or tear a man's arm out its socket but not to toss a car down the block. Strength comparable to an actual gorilla. On the other hand, some writers do not write Wolverine with heightened strength. So there is contradiction over the matter depending on who is writing the story. Therfor the easiest way to avoid a mess is to simply state that "due to his constant cellular regeneration and the additional wieght and tensile strength of his skeleton he has great physical strength." This sidesteps the whole issue, is entirely accurate, and is a true appraisal without getting into this silly controversy.

These are erroneous and non NPOV statements taken from Nightscreams version:

1) "Additionally, some readers believe that Wolverine's strength, agility, and reflexes are enhanced beyond a range attainable by normal human beings (or even humans in absolute peak physical condition such as Captain America)."
Stating what readers do or do not believe is not NPOV.
2)" Although the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe has long listed his strength as merely being within the highest level achievable by a normal human being engaging in intensive regular exercise."
The Marvel Universe Master Edition Issue 4 clearly states that Wolverine's strength is enhanced human. Enhanced human is defined in the index of that handbook as a character being able to lift significantly above 800 pounds and less than 2 tons. This is the lowest order of superhuman strength. A an actual person doing steroids could reach the low spectrum of this range. The record for the overhead press (clean and jerk) in the olympics is 580 pounds, but there are people have broken that record by at least 200 or 300 pounds, through the use of dangerous performance enhancing drugs (strong man contests on television are the best example of this).
All 3 Marvel Universes that have been released since that time (Marvel Universe X-Men 2004, Marvel Universe Wolverine 2004, and Marvel Universe Age of Apocalypse 2005 all list Wolverine's strength level at level 4. Level 4 is defined in the index as being superhuman: range between 800 pounds and 25 tons. Marvel would not have made the same mistake in 4 different editions of the Marvel Universe (5 if you include the website).
Nightscream's statment is erroneous, as it refers to an edition that was published 18 years ago (and wasn't accurate then) and ignores every version of the Marvel Universe published since that time. The Master Edition is the basis for all of the newer Marvel Universes released in 2004. The older editions from the 80's were mostly written by Peter Sanderson who at the time was not intimately familiar with the newer characters. To my knowledge he has never written an X-Men or Wolverine comic.
3) "The text of the most recent edition, the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe: X-Men 2004, similarly contains no mention of superhuman strength. "
That is not the most recent edition to include a profile of Wolverine. Wolverine 2004 and Age of Apocalypse 2005 were both published more recently. He is ommitting them because they do not support his argument. Wolverine has "enhanced" strength. Wolverine 2004 explicitly states in the text that the tensile strength of Wolverine's skeleton allows his body to resist higher levels of pressure than a normal human allowing him to lift, in effect, more than a normal human.
Considering the X-Men 2004 edition does list the character at level 4, and contains an index explaining what level 4 means, that IS a mention of the character having enhanced strength.
As far as the inconsistant text, it was text directly copied from an earlier out of date issue (Marvel Universe Deluxe Edition 16) published over 18 years ago. Very easy to verify.
4) "those who allege such strength on his part point out that both sources contradict themselves, in that while the text does indicate this, the statistic gauges lists in these sources his strength level at 4."
Those who allege? not NPOV.
The only source that contradicts itself is the X-Men 2004 version that copies a block of text directly from an out-dated issue. This is easy to verify.
5) "These readers also point to instances such Wolverine #1 (1988), when Wolverine hoisted half a dozen men over his head and ran through a wall with them. Assuming each man weighed an average of 150 lbs, the total weight combined with their weaponry would be between 900 and 1000 lbs, which, to these readers, indicates that Wolverine is capable of lifting at least 1 ton, and that this elevated strength is not obvious because Wolverine usually relies on a combination of sheer ferocity and skill rather than brute strength. "
This is misleading. There have been quite a few instances where the character has demonstrated enhanced level strength, and a few more were Wolverine himself (or the narrator) specifically states that he has enhanced strength (New Invaders #6, New X-Men Mutant Academy X #10, Wolverine Vol.2 #1.). In X-Men 111 and Wolverine: Rio he manages to break steel bonds, although it takes considerable effort on his part. Wolverine annual 2001 has him easily overpowering Vermin who can lift 1000 pounds. He has also managed to overpower the Beast although this was more through greater skill than sheer brute force. In other comics he has torn the doors off of cars, tossed steel girders wieghing at least several hundred pounds several feet in the air, etc, etc.
6)" ...lack of any explicit indication in the comics (and indications to the contrary in the reference books) may suggest that these instances may be a result of artistic license on the part of the artists (who are generally not responsible for establishing facts about characters)..."
Artists like, John Byrne, Jack Kirby, and Jim Lee, often co-wrote (or even entirely wrote) the comics that are responsible for establishing so-called facts about these fictional characters. Artists draw what the writers tell them to. This statement by Nightscream is actually condescending toward artists by suggesting they aren't involved in the writing process of comic books.
As far as an explicit indication is concerned, I don't know what could be more explicit than Wolverine saying in a panel that he has enhanced strength. Or the narrator stating it. Both have happened in 2005.

The fact is that some writers clearly do portray him as having moderate superhuman strength and some writers clearly do not. The easiest way to avoid this mess is with the statment, "the additional wieght and tensile strength of Wolverine's skeleton combined with his constant cellular regeneration grants him great physical strength". This satisfies both camps without sacrificing any accuracy.ScifiterX 06:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC) (revised many times)

Village Pump discussion (moved here 12:21, July 14, 2005 (UTC))

That's a one sided account. You might want to talk to User:SoM as well, and take a look at Talk:Wolverine (comics), Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics and I think I have a few messages concerning the situation on my talk page User Talk:Hiding. I've tried to keep my hands out of it because I haven't as yet managed to read the information Nightscream wants inserted, it being about ten paraghraphs (off the top of my head). It's mostly unneccesary. What it boils down to is that superheroes are fictional characters featured in serial fiction, and as such their abilities, powers and character tend to be written inconsistently, given that they are written by a huge number of seperate writers. Whilst nobody denies that point, at least as I can understand the debate which is formatted very badly, Nightscream seems to want nothing less than to detail every single inconsistency. Have a look at the revert history to see his insertion. I confess to being a coward, I started to try and copyedit the article to a better standard but got scared off. I've backed away because the whole situation seems unmanageable, or at least too time consuming. Apologies. I personally would have thought the fact that Wolverine was a fictional superhero character would have clued people in to the fact that he isn't going to be portrayed consistently, but I'm certainly not going to object if a note to the effect that that superheroes are fictional characters featured in serial fiction, and as such their abilities, powers and character tend to be written inconsistently is inserted, however it would then have to be inserted into all superhero comic book characters, and would need to gain consensus. Hiding 21:31, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
It isn't between between myself and Nightscream. Its between Nightscream and at least 6 people, including myself, that have been reverting his huge and non-NPOV entry. I have simply been the most outspoken advocate. The way it was worded (before Nightscream) it was brief and it avoided inconsistancy by simply stating what editors and writers have always agreed upon. The problem with reducing Nightscream's additions is that what he is writing is opinion disguised as an objective evaluation of fact. I am tired of dealing with him as when I tried to explain this to him he started leaving insulting messages on my talk page two or sometimes three times a day and accuses me of "name calling" and duplicity and people who see the discussion and are too lazy to look and see what has actually been said just take for granted he is being honest. If you look at the facts, its not his passion for accuracy that's driving him. He's just being antagonistic. I would prefer to have an accurate entry that doesn't have a section devoted to his wolverine's powers that is 7 to 12 paragraphs long and based on the impassioned opinions of a fan. If enough people don't share my opinion, let Nightscream re-write the whole entry. ScifiterX 05:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I already looked as I attempted to find a solution. Actually its a cursory account; inconsistency isn't the issue since it can be assumed; whether its notable is. If so then we can work on reducing Nightscream's additions; if not then it shouldn't be added. - RoyBoy 800 03:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Ah, I see, I misunderstood. Well, my thoughts on what is and isn't notable:
  • The fact that Wolverine's healing power can not regenerate his heart being ripped out does not necessarily negate his healing power regenerating eyes, in fact, God help me, if one were to posit that the healing agent were housed within his blood stream, it would appear quite logical.
    • Officially, by definition he can regenerate eyes and nervous tissue, just not entire limbs. Its in the 1991 Marvel Universe entry that is posted in the discussion. That is why in the Age of Apocalypse parrallel earth he has only on hand. It didn't grow back. 05:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Actually, there's an instory explanation for that. Wolverine can't regenerate whole limbs only when his skeleton is adamantium-laced. The adamantium prevented his body from creating another hand. --Pc13 08:57, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
Nope. Superhuman regenerative healing factor is officially defined with the limitation of not being able to regenerate limbs. Metahuman regenerative can though, that is what the Lizard has. Its in the Marvel Comics Master Edition Index, clear as day.ScifiterX 10:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
However, it is possible that the physical trauma (which his AofA counterpart has not had) have had the effect of pushing his body into a metahuman regenerative range. Alot has happened to poor Logan since 1991.ScifiterX 10:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • The convalescence issue is granted, somewhat looser and could bear a mention in an abbreviated form. Claremont's approach to the character involved longer convalescences than other writers, and Claremont was the established writer of the character at the time; other writer's may not have been following guidelines or Wolverine may have needed to be seen to heal quicker to maintain consistency with appearances elsewhere. It could also be that guidelines have changed.
  • As to the contradictions regarding Wolverine's strength He's a fictional character. What is strength level? How would you even define it? You could say some fans believe Wolverine is possessed of some level of superhuman strength, although no such strength has been explicitly defined, but is that a redundancy? Are superheroes assumed to have superhuman strength?
  • The character's strength level is in the nebulous area between what is the pinnacle of olympic level physical strength and what could be considered superhuman. This level is referred to as "enhanced". Its a level that a real person, steroid induced, could conceivably reach. The fact is that some writers clearly portray him as moderately superhumanly strong and some clearly do not. The easiest way to avoid this mess is just to state "due to the additional wieght and increased tensile strength of his skeleton combined with his constant cellular regeneration, he has great physical strength". Avoids the whole mess and everybody's happy.
My source is:
  • Marvel Universe Master Edition Issue 4 (character listed as enhanced strength)
  • Marvel Universe X-Men 2004 (character listed as level 4; at least enhanced strength)
  • Marvel Universe Wolverine 2004 (character listed as level 4; at least enhanced strength)
  • Marvel Universe Age of Apocalypse 2005 (character listed as level 4; at least enhanced strength)
  • Marvel Universe Website Entry for Wolverine (character listed as level 4; at least enhanced strength)
  • The 1982 and 1986 versions of the Marvel Universe were mostly written by Peter Sanderson who never wrote or edited an X-Men or Wolverine comic in his life. You have to remember that back then correspondance between writers and editors was much more limited. No email. No internet. ScifiterX 05:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Sanderson wrote the Handbooks but were edited by Mark Gruenwald, who was the company's continuity guru. What happens is that, in regard to strength, the handbooks always rounded the strength levels down, especially on superhuman strength. The 1986 edition, OHOTMUDE #14, gives Wolverine "normal strength" - which even for then didn't make much sense - in order to use his claws effectively, his muscle tissue needed to be stronger than that of a normal human, but not necessarily superhuman. --Pc13 08:57, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • The part about the claws being bone rather than keratin is interesting, that might be worth noting. Other than that, I don't know, I'd err on brevity and drop it. Hiding 09:08, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
    • Superheroes don't have to always have superhuman strength. Look at Batman, he's a "super"hero but he's only a really buff mortal, no powers or anything. Similarly, The Flash has super speed, thereby enabling him to rapidly pummel a foe, but the actual blow-by-blow effects are no different from an ordinary human.
    • Bone? Keratin? I thought they were adamantine, or are you talking about the parts inside the arm that force the blades out?
    • Still, it's an interesting little disagreement... having not seen Wolverine outside of the cartoons and movies I really can't help more than that. GarrettTalk 10:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

      • I take the point that Batman doesn't have superstrength and The Flash doesn't have superstregth, sloppy phrasing on my part. The problem with Wolverine is; does he have strength greater than what one would expect of a bloke with an adamantium skeleton, and if so, how does one quantify it; because part of what Nightscream is trying to insert is that his level of strength is portrayed as inconsistent, even though it hasn't been defined within the comics. The level of strength he's using to define it is that of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, which some people consider canon and some people don't, and which even contradicts itself, at least according to Nightscream, and is the point where I get in over my head. I hope that all makes some sort of sense.
The problem is that Nightscream doesn't just say that its inconsistant he illustrates arguments for and against which are thinly veiled attempted to vindicate his own opinion.ScifiterX 05:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
      • I do know that the adamantium is bonded somehow to his skeleton, and apparently this was somehow removed in a story at some point in the last ten years, leaving him with just a normal skeleton and, it transpired, bone claws, which apparently should have been keratin. That said, in his first appearance his claws were telescopic, housed in his costume and of metal, so it's all inconsistent at some level. Hiding 13:35, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
    • Since Hiding pointed this out to me, but I'm too tired to read the whole discussion above/go into detail right now (so I'll apologise in advance if what I do say is rambling, since I'm tired and this isn't in the articlespace), I'll just say that my major problems with Nightscream's version are that (1) It's too long by somewhere between five and ten times, and as such is unreadable [Hiding mentioned this as well on the Talk page at least] (2) Wikipedia is not a soapbox or an indiscriminate collection of information (3) Being as he is a fictional character, it is impossible to measure Wolverine's exact strength level, and thus listing numbers for what he can lift/etc is pointless, especially since writers reguarly ignore this sort of stuff when writing stories, especially since superstrength isn't Wolverine's "Signature" power (e.g., as speed is to The Flash) - his claws, senses and healing factor are his signatures. If it serves the story for him to be slightly superstrong (or fast), he will be. If it serves the story for him to not be, he won't. And engaging in a long discussion in the article along the lines of "some stories/sources say he is, some say he isn't" means nothing when there is no true answer to be had.
I agree with you. That is what I have been saying all along.ScifiterX 05:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Oh, on a couple of minor points:
      • His claws are adamantium-coated bone, but the adamantium was removed in X-Men #25 (leading into Wolverine #75) and restored in Wolverine #145 (which was actually a flashback comic that revealed it had been rebonded, technically he first appeared with it back in the second Astonishing X-Men miniseries)
      • They weren't drawn as telescopic in his first appearance, even though the writer DID intend them to be housed in his gloves rather than his arms. - SoM 20:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
        • Len Wein didn't flesh out Wolverine that much. It wasn't explicit if the claws were part of the uniform or a power - being made of metal, it was safe to assume they were part of the costume, and it was only Claremont who established they were inside Wolverine's body. Artists like Herb Trimpe and Dave Cockrum drew them as pointy claws, while John Byrne, Frank Miller and John Romita Jr. drew them as blades. --Pc13 08:57, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
Please don't have the actual argument here. -- Cyrius| 20:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Some sort of compromise

Alright, let's try and get everyone talking at the table.

I'm going to put my cards on the table. I note people are referring to official positions and descriptions. Straight off the bat I'm going to state I'm not convinced these official positions or definitions, these handbooks, are of much worth, since the only people who decide what Wolverine can do are the writer and the editor. So I guess we either open up the can and have every Marvel superhero entry include a section which defines their powers as per the official handbook, which needless to say is copyright info, or we don't. I suppose that info could be given in some sort of info box, is that an idea?

Otherwise, we put a disclaimer to the effect that although the official handbook defines (character's) powers, it is felt these definitions aren't cannonical since any writer editor combination may disregard these handbook entries, and the entries themselves may not reflect the character or his abilities if the character is a long established one. Or something like that.

Or we just ignore the handbooks.

As to what is contradictory, the article also mentions his healing power is contradictory, so are all participants in the page prepared to accept that wording?

An area which I think should be noted in the article is the fact that his claws are bone rather than keratin, and I also found the piece about his claws being never in his wrist of some interest. I can see a reader being informed by that, so I think it should be included.

I don't find the regeneration of eyes to contradict non-regeneration of the heart.

The strength issue is the hardest. Is the strength issue covered in the line Wolverine is a mutant with a number of both natural and artificial improvements to his physiology. or does it need further clarification? Maybe a it is unknown whether Wolverine possesses stregth greater than would be expected of a man who has an adamantium skeleton bonded to his own. Wolverine has not been shown to posess strength of the level of Superman or The Hulk, although he has been shown to posess some level of above average strength. bit?

Anyway, that's my two cents. Hiding 13:26, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

  • Your input is appreciated, Hiding. My understanding of the Handbooks, is that Peter Sanderson derived the information therein when he wrote them by researching the material, and (I could be wrong here) interviewing those creators most involved with developing the characters. Since the Handbooks are published by Marvel about their own characters, of course they're canon. But you're absolutely right when you say that creators sometimes disregard them, and for that matter, prior established material. Just look, for example, at how the appearance of the Morlock Leech changed from his first appearance to his X-Factor appearances. But this is precisely why I think the issue should be mentioned: If sources of different information are contradictory, a reference source like Wikipedia should mention it. If you're going to state his powers, and substantial info is presented that indicates he has superhuman strength, it should be mentioned. Not just kept vague. The line about his physiology simply begins the section, but it doesn't imply anything about his strength. There is also nothing wrong to referring to copyrighted material, so long as it is not transcribed verbatim (or if it is, not an amount that would violate the Fair Use Clause), and properly credited. The eye/heart point goes to the question of whether he can regenerate entire organs. And thanks for your thoughts on the aspects of my contributions you think should be mentioned. :-) Nightscream 7.14.05. 10:26am EST
    • Actually, Sanderson himself has stated that Gruenwald felt his entries in the first guide were too specific.[1] I haven't read any guides since the first, so I don't know what info is contained. I think the eye/heart debate is too specific, because as far as I know it has never been specified that Wolverine can regenerate organs. As to how specific and vague we should be, my understanding is that the place to mention that the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe is contradicted by the comics is in the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe rather than each individual character's article.
    • As to substantial references to his strength, do we have that? I appreciate the fair use policy, but since we can't use Marvel definitions verbatim, it makes using them difficult in my opinion, if they talk of level four strength. I think part of the issue is how detailed a section on Wolverine's powers should be. I am quite happy with a short disclaimer with regards to consistency, I don't think references actually need to be cited, since inconsistency amongst writers in fictional characters is implicit. Hiding 16:02, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • The way it was stated entirely avoided this whole issue. This seems to be being ignored. If you simply state that "due to his constant cellular regeneration and the additional wieght and tensile strength of his skeleton he has great physical strength" you avoid the whole mess. So lets just do that. I have repeatedly said that and its like no one reads it. All I was doing (on the discussion page) was refutting Nightscream's statements and proving, conclusively, that he was ommitting facts and distorting information to prove his point, while trying to make it look like he was simply objectively evaluating different opinions that he is somehow the expert of. I don't actually want the article to be that specific. If somebody wants to put a sentence in there stating that his strength level has been portrayed with some contradiction depending on the writer, that's fine. But not a 6 paragraph synopsis on the opinions of fans and why they are wrong by Nightscream. Come on that is just silly.ScifiterX 20:16, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Building to a consensus

    • First off, let's also bear in mind we aren't here to avoid a mess, but represent any debate, as per how to write a great article. What we need to do is work out whether there is a debate about Woloverine's stregth levels, if we can cite magazine articles or the like on that debate, and then refer to it, as briefly and concisely as possible, within the article. Also, can everyone please stay calm, Wikipedia:Assume good faith and avoid personal attacks.
How is refuting what someone has said a personal attack? I am not attacking the guy. But advocating an opinion is not attacking someone else. Jeez.
Another point. Emphasis is being confused for emotion. When I make a major point I like to put it in bold so it stands out. If for any other reason, it helps me find my place in the discussion so I can go back and see what I have said without getting lost. ITS NOT THAT I'M TOTALLY FREAKING OUT OH MY GAWD PLEASE HELP ME I AM GOING TO GO INSANE. Just kidding.ScifiterX 21:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I also think it is always a good idea to avoid a mess in an article. I hope I am not alone on that.ScifiterX 21:39, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Second, we need to decide if the Official Handbook is an acceptable reference tool to use when writing these articles.
Thats a bit of a trick question. Its good as a basic guide but its not like we are talking about the established laws of physics here. The comics are even better as a basic guide. These are fictional characters and utlimately this is an encyclopedia and not a the handbook of the Marvel Universe so the descriptions ought to be fairly vague and concise and not copyvio of the handbook. The descriptions need to be much more basic and brief than handbook descriptions.ScifiterX 21:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
But that's not the point. The point is, is the handbook an acceptable research tool? It's a citable source on levels of stregth and so on, so are we disregarding it as a source in certain areas, due to the ambiguous way the data is presented.Hiding 21:47, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
It is an acceptable research tool to a point. The guide often contradicts itself because of the broad spectrum of fictional material and hundreds of different creative opinions involved. So its good to get a feel, but the level of depth and specific wording should definately be avoided.ScifiterX 21:56, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Right, so my opoinion is that we need to get a policy at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics together to reflect that, so that if we have this row again we can point to it as our consensual position. Hiding 22:51, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • So, two questions: ScifiterX, are you are most concerned about the strength issue, yes? Do you object to mentions of the other controversial area, that of the claws being bone and not keratin, and the way they work, being added?
That particular topic (bone or keratin) has always seemed irrelevant to me. The claws have to be bone because they have showed they were bone. As far as it being a mistake of the writers lack of scientific knowledge that lead to that, that's a bit non NPOV. We don't know what the writers were thinking. Personally I think bone claws was the most logical way to explain how the guy could have muscles in his arms specifically designed to manipulate claws without having an electronic or mechanical device in them. I don't think it was scientific ignorance on the part of writers.ScifiterX 21:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
No, what's notable about the claws is that they are made of bone rather than keratin. I'm merely advocating a line which notes that Wolverine's claws have been described as made of bone, even though within the animal kingdom claws are typically made of keratin. I agree we can not comment on any writer's motivation for describing them as such. Hiding 21:48, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
Yah, but at one point someone said it was possibly the result of the error of a writer or something like that. That's not NPOV. That is what I was talking about. Saying that they are bone and not keratin doesn't make any difference to me although it does seem unnecessary. I don't really have a problem with it.ScifiterX 21:56, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Cool. I think it's notable, and it informs, so I'd like it in. Hiding 22:51, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • Nightscream, are you happy for the strength issue to be resolved with the wording "due to his constant cellular regeneration and the additional weight and tensile strength of his skeleton he has great physical strength. Whilst this strength has been defined at a comparitively low level in the official Marvel handbook, writers have portrayed Wolverine with greater stregth than that definition suggests.", and for the wording He can regenerate organs such as eyes and large portions of flesh, but not completely severed limbs. His healing factor has been depicted with some degree of contradiction, depending on the writer to cover the controversy regarding his healing powers?
    • Anybody else?
I am basically happy with that.ScifiterX 21:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
That's fine.--GingerM 19:10, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Please bear in mind we need to build consensus around such a position so that we do not continuously engage in edit warring. Please also remember the 3RR. Hiding 21:07, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
      • Hiding, this is, and always has been, Nightscream vs. everyone else. Look at the page history. Multiple users have reverted to the non-Nightscream section, and only Nightscream (logged in and otherwise) has reverted to his version. There is a consensus here, with only one particularly vocal user dissenting to protect what is, literally, his version. - SoM 22:27, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, I've always maintained that the Handbook power descriptions, especially the numbers, are useless, so that's no skin off my rosy nose. Frankly, the (non-NS) current section is a compromise on my part after an earlier edit war, and my preference would be to shorten it if anything. He's got claws, his bones can't be broken 'cause they're metal-coated, he heals, and he sees/smells/hears/etc things real good. IMO, that's all the powers section needs to say. - SoM 20:33, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm mostly with SoM here. ScifiterX 21:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Whilst I agree about the Handbook, we need to get some sort of consensus in this area. Otherwise we could be having this discussion on every Marvel character's page. I'm for short, but I'd also like to be concise. I think including how the claws work is interesting, I note Superman does that, and I think we have to at least make some mention of the inconsistencies. Isn't there some sort of consensus on strength levels somewhere that we can refer to? I'm sure I've seen one before. We could work that into a guidline and see if we can get it passed. Hiding 21:14, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
I do not anticipate that we will have this happen on every marvel characters page. Characters are not universal in terms of development and popularity. A popular character, like Wolverine or Superman, is going to attract some type of conflict about "something". You are not going to see this argument about the Walrus (a foe of Spiderman). Unless of course someone who reads this decides to get cute. As far as Wolverine goes, if it wasn't this issue it would be another one. Its best to just look at it on a case by case basis instead of retroactively going back and tampering with over 100 entries, many of which are fairly concise and decent.ScifiterX 21:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Here we go, Talk:Strength level (comics). Also, I've requested page protection to prevent the continuous reverting. We can work out how to resolve this and then get the page unprotected. Hiding 21:18, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
But wich version are you going to make sure doesn't get reverted? That's the question.ScifiterX 21:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't know, that's up to the admin I guess. I don't know if we can specify a version. Hiding 21:47, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
Pages are supposed to be protected on whatever version is there when the protection is applied. The locking admin is not meant to favour either (or one, if there's more than two) version. - SoM 22:27, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm. Hiding 22:51, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I have written a more condensed edit containing my contributions to the section. Let me know what you think. :-) Nightscream Sat. 7.16.05. 4:13am EST.

I sincerely appreciate your attempt to compromise here, but that is still way too much information. I am going to put your new version on here so that everybody in the discussion can look at it though. ScifiterX 09:15, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Current Edit

Powers and abilities

Wolverine from Wolverine Unleashed
Jim Lee, artist.

Wolverine is a mutant with a number of both natural and artificial improvements to his physiology. He regenerates and heals hundreds of times faster than a normal human, and has recovered completely from injuries that would have killed most humans, even those with superhuman abilities. He can regenerate organs such as eyes and large portions of flesh, but not completely severed limbs. His healing factor has been depicted with some degree of contradiction, depending on the writer.

This "healing factor" also grants immunity to most toxins and diseases, gives him enough stamina to exert himself at peak levels for days, and retards aging to an unknown degree. He is well over 100 years old, yet his appearance and physique are unchanged since the peak years of his life (apparently over a century ago). However, writers have suggested that the healing factor is also the cause of his amnesia.

Wolverine possesses heightened senses enabling him to see and hear distant objects more clearly than a normal human, and identify and track someone purely by scent. His heightened sense of smell is slightly more developed than that of Daredevil. They are actually a result of his constant cellular regeneration as are his agility and reflexes.

Wolverine's physical appearance also displays animal-like mutations, including sharper-than-normal teeth with two pronounced canines, and six retractable claws housed within his forearms, which he can release from behind his knuckles (causing bleeding that is rapidly healed). The claws are made of bone, unlike the claws of normal mammals, which are made of keratin.

X-Ray depicting Wolverine's adamantium claws from the film X-Men

Wolverine's claws and skeleton have been molecularly laced with nigh-indestructible metal Adamantium. The adamantium coating keeps the claws sharp and mean that his ability to cut through things is limited by his strength, not the claws. The tensile strength and additional weight of his skeleton combined with his constant cellular regeneration grants him great physical strength as his body is able to withstand higher levels physical pressure than a normal human. His exact level of physical strength has been depicted with some degree of contradiction, depending on the writer. His blows are weighted (similar to using brass knuckles) due to the presence of this metal.


Wolverine has extraordinary hand to hand combat ability, and, alongside Captain America and Taskmaster, is considered one of the finest combatants on Earth. He can use most weapons, long or close-range. He is also an accomplished pilot and extremely well trained in espionage and covert operations.

Though seemingly brutish, Wolverine is not unintelligent. Due to his increased lifespan, he has been able to travel around the world and amass an intimate knowledge of many foreign customs and cultures. This has endowed him with vast knowledge in literature and philosophy. He is fluent in English, Japanese, Russian, Chinese, Lakota, and Spanish. It is also known that he has knowledge of several other foreign languages. In more recent stories it has been revealed that Wolverine has some skills at computer hacking.

Nightscream's New Edit

Wolverine's Powers and Abilities

Wolverine is a mutant with a number of both natural and artificial enhancements to his physiology.

The cells of Wolverine’s body regenerate many times faster than those of normal humans, allowing him to regenerate damaged tissue at a speed far beyond that of normal humans. This “healing factor,” as it is called, is automatic, and not subject to Wolverine’s will, and has enabled him to completely recover within minutes or even seconds from devastating injuries which would prove fatal to most humans, such as severe blunt force trauma, stabbings, gunshot wounds, vehicular impacts, and severe burns over his entire body. This ability extends fully to his nervous system, which is largely not the case for normal human beings, and is so advanced that his body can even expel foreign objects, such as the parasitic eggs of the alien race known as the Brood, as seen in Uncanny X-Men #162 (Oct. 1982) and Uncanny X-Men #234 (Late Sept. 1988). Extremely severe injuries, however, have taken longer periods of time for him to recover. For example, in Uncanny X-Men #225 (Jan. 1988) he took what appeared to be several minutes to an hour to heal from several laser blasts, during which he could barely move. However, in Wolverine #39 (May 1991), his body repaired itself from severe burns covering his entire body within what appeared to be a few minutes or less, during which he was able to not only stand, but walk out of the burnt building carrying an object the size of a young child. In another book, all the skin and other tissue on his face was blown entirely away by a massive gunshot blast, leaving only his hair, eyes, and skull features, an injury that appeared to take longer to heal, as it persisted for far longer throughout that issue and into the next one. It took almost two months to recover from his duel with Shingen Harada in the first Wolverine miniseries (1983), in which a sword went all the way through his trunk. His longest convalescence period depicted may have been that which followed the beating and torture received in Uncanny X-Men #251 (Nov. 1989) from Donald Pierce, Lady Deathstrike and the Reavers, which involved multiple harpoonings, whippings, crucifixion in the hot Australia desert, and further torture. This healing period lasted at least a couple of years (reader's time, though it is unclear how much time it took within the comic book). During this period, he was visibly slower and weaker, and his body's ability to tolerate his cigar habit was compromised.

Other benefits of the healing factor include effective immunity to most diseases, poisons, or drugs (except in massive doses), and limited immunity to the fatigue poisons generated by bodily activity, resulting in greatly improved stamina. Because of his cellular regeneration, Wolverine ages far more slowly than humans, as he was born in the late 1800s, and, from photos has aged little since World War II.

Oddly, even the hair on his head, face, and body seems to grow rapidly following an injury to those parts of his body, but stops when it reaches the length by which he is commonly recognized, including his trademark sideburns, as seen in his recovery from severe burns that he incurred all over his body in Wolverine #39 (May 1991), during which he did not grow a beard or mustache of corresponding length. How the hair on different parts of his head and face “knows” when to grow, but stop at this desired length is unknown.

Wolverine’s healing factor can even regenerate some internal organs, for example, such as his eyes, but not all organs. He cannot, for example, survive his heart being ripped out of his body, as established in Uncanny X-Men Annual #11 (1986). It is unknown whether he can regenerate entire limbs that have been completely severed, though it is thought to be unlikely.

Wolverine from Wolverine Unleashed
Jim Lee, artist.
X-Ray depicting Wolverine's adamantium claws from the film X-Men

Wolverine has also displayed apparent acts of superhuman strength, such as breaking free of chains, and lifting several men over his head during brawls, but it is unclear whether Chris Claremont, the writer who guided him for most of the characters first two decades, intended these as instances of superhuman strength, or as the result of the adrenaline surge accompanying his “berserker rages.” It is also possible that having a adamantium-reinforced skeleton grants him heightened strength. The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe initially indicated that he merely had the normal strength of a human who engages in intensive regular exercise, but more recent editions indicate that his strength is enhanced, and some of the comics themselves have stated or implied this. It is possible that he was initially not conceived as having superhuman strength by Claremont, but that subsequent writers decided otherwise, or that if Claremont intended him to have superhuman strength, that it was not obvious because Wolverine usually relies on a combination of sheer ferocity and skill rather than brute strength.

It is also possible he has superhuman agility, insofar as he has held his own in fights against others who do, such as Spider-Man.

Wolverine also possesses superhumanly acute senses that are comparable to those of certain animals, enabling him to see and hear distant objects more clearly than a normal human (though it is not known if he can perceive objects in the infrared or ultraviolet portions of the spectrum), and identify and track someone purely by scent. His sense of smell has been developed to such a level that he is able to tell the miniscule chemical difference between items of different brands, such as deodorants, cigarettes, alcohol, etc, despite being advertised as having the same scent. According to the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, his hearing is only slightly less developed than that of Daredevil, and with concentration, allows him to detect the rhythm of a normal heartbeat within a distance of 200 feet. It is not known if his sense of taste or touch are similarly enhanced. Although his elevated senses may be thought of as a separate ability, the Handbook indicates that they are actually a result of his heightened cellular regeneration.

Wolverine's physical appearance also displays number of animal-like mutations, including two fangs among his teeth, and more famously, six slightly curved retractable claws housed within his forearms, which he can release from beneath his knuckles (causing bleeding that is rapidly healed by his healing factor). The claws lie beneath the skin and muscle of his forearms, and are connected directly to his skeleton and nervous system. He can unsheathe any number of his claws at once. Although claws in the animal kingdom are made of keratin, Wolverine's are made of bone. The claws are never inside his wrist, as they are always either completely inside his forearms when not in use, or his hands when in use. This allows him to bend his wrists freely in either mode, but requires him to keep them straight when unsheathing or retracting them. The Handbook describes the claws as being a foot in length (though it is unlikely that a man 5’ 3” in height would have arms long enough to hold objects of this length).

Wolverine's skeleton, including his claws, has been completely coated in the nigh-indestructible metal adamantium. Adamantium can be cut with a special subatomic particle beam; otherwise, to all intents and purposes it is virtually indestructible, and by extension, so are his bones and claws. Due to the adamantium coating (which also maintains the cutting edge), the limiting factor on what he can cut through is based upon his own strength, rather than the resiliency of the claws. The adamantium coating on his skeleton interferes with his bones' ability to produce red blood cells, but is compensated by his accelerated cellular regeneration, as established in Uncanny X-Men #237 (Early Nov. 1988).


Wolverine has extraordinary hand to hand combat ability, and, alongside Captain America and Taskmaster, is considered one of the finest combatants on Earth. He can use most weapons, long or close-range. He is also an accomplished pilot and extremely well trained in espionage and covert operations.

Though seemingly brutish, Wolverine is not unintelligent. Due to his increased lifespan, he has been able to travel around the world and amass an intimate knowledge of many foreign customs and cultures. This has endowed him with vast knowledge in literature and philosophy. He is fluent in English, Japanese, Russian, Chinese, Lakota, and Spanish. It is also known that he has knowledge of several other foreign languages. In more recent stories it has been revealed that Wolverine has some skills at computer hacking.


Well first, the issues you are referring to where Wolverine was picking up several people over his head or breaking chains were actually written by Chris Claremont. Except for Black Rio, that was written by Joe Casey.

Second Wolverine's agility is considered enhanced, just like his strength. Enhanced is the nebulous region between what a human in peak physical condition could do and what could be considered truly superhuman. Spider-Man actually has truly superhuman agility. So Spidey is just a hair more agile, although Wolverine might be able to compensate using superior technique and what not. Enhanced is best thought of as the physical capacity of a wild animal as opposed to a human. Enhanced human strength would be as strong as a gorilla or a bear, enhanced human agility would be as agile as a leopard, etc. An good approximation of enhanced strength would be the level of a gorilla. A gorilla can tear a man in half (heck a chimpanzee can do that), but a gorilla couldn't throw a tank or a car, or even lift a car (for long). A good example of enhanced agility would be a monkey or a leapard. A particularly agile cat or monkey could easily out class any olympic gymnist but they can't jump 3 stories straight up into the air. Spiderman can do that.

The main objection I have to even your new edit is that it just has a lot of unnecessary information. We don't need to know about the rate that his hair follicles can grow or that his bones can be damaged by subatomic particle beam. We just need the essential information. His signature powers.

Also the bones are usually described as laced not coated. Laced means that they would look like they were solid adamantium until you looked at them through a microscope. Then you would see that they were more sponge-like. This would allow for blood to still be made in the marrow of the bones and circulated through there surface through tiny nearly microscopic corpuscles to the rest of the body. ScifiterX 09:47, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I am aware that Claremont wrote the issue in question. That's why I mentioned that it may have been Claremont's intention. As for Wolverine's agility, I mentioned that it may be superhuman. I see little distinction between what you describe as superhuman and enhanced. If a human were a strong as a gorilla, then his strength would most certainly be superhuman. As for whether the information is unnecessary, again, that is your opinion, and we should not delete information simply because a given user has that aesthetic reaction to it. We should let readers decide what information they need or want. I find the bit about his hair interesting. That's just me. That we just need his "signature" powers is also an opinion. And the point of what can harm adamantium serves to illustrate their indesctructibility. As for the lace/coating issue, have both words not been used in the comics? Nightscream Sat. 7.16.05. 7:09am EST

Four words: No No No and No.

Look, there are two comic continuities referred to on the page, and three non-comic continuities that probably deserve more detail than they get (the movies, the X-Men animated series, and X-Men Evolution). The powers section is common to all and thus should refer only to powers that ARE common to all, at levels of detail that would be appropriate to all.

If you insist on keeping attempting to lengthen it with more non-notable details, I'll start cutting it down beyond the original to what I think it should be. I've only been defending the current version in the name of consensus, and if you're going to manage to break that consensus by reverting to your version time after time for months in a row, why shouldn't everyone else do the same thing? - SoM 12:25, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I think this passage from Wikipedia:The perfect article is relevant:

  • Is an appropriate length. The article must be long enough to provide sufficient information, depth, and analysis on its subject, without including unnecessary detail or information. An article does not HAVE to be long to be good, but it must fully explore the subject, and in most cases this requires a certain length.

What we have to do is reach a consensus on what's long enough to provide sufficient information, depth and analysis. Since we now seem unable to do so, I'm opening this out to further debate from WP:RFC.

My thoughts on the hair issue are that it isn't notable. Everyone's hair grows to a certain length, no more, a length thought to be defined within your genes somewhere.

Nightscream, everyone else, are you prepared to accept the consensual position we reach?

I am not prepared to accept any compromise with Nightscream's version over this that increases the length of the section. As far as I'm concerned, the current version is already a compromise on my part from an earlier edit war, and I'm not prepared to compromise on the compromise any further than I already have. Only Nightscream is pushing his version against an already-existing consensus, enforced by reverts of his version by most of the other people who have worked on this article (at least 5 other users have reverted Nightscream's version at a glance), and if he succeeds in altering the consensus by sheer weight of reverts, it sets a horrible precedent, and I don't see how that can be good for the community as a whole. - SoM 19:42, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

RFC against Nightscream

The problem here is, we have to follow the process. Yes the current edit is the consensual position, and since Nightscream has indicated that he will not reach a consensual position then he should be listed at WP:RFC. I've just done that, so can others add their voices at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Nightscream with how they have tried to reach a compromise with Nightscream, and the problems we're having with him here. Hiding 14:30, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
I pretty much agree with SoM. I really tried to look for something in Nightscream's revision that we could add, and I just couldn't find anything. I did notice that it was much more well written and objective, but it still just adds allot of unnecessary minutia. ScifiterX 20:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
In addition, you'll note that Nightscream continues to push his (new) version in deliberate ignorance of whatever discussion is going on here, and has changed the article to his version and been reverted by T-1000 since I posted the above message, ignoring the discussion here. - SoM 20:58, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

More distortion. This discussion is being waged on a number of different pages, from the Village Pump to the Request for Comment page, to the Wolverine Discussion Page, to our individual Talk Pages, and it's hard to keep track of it all. I'm not "ignoring" anything. I simply just discovered this thread now. This is more of the same sort of self-serving description of my actions that's being going on for some time now: When I post, I get insulted regarding the "gems" I leave on pages, supposedly, according to ScifiterX, because I just want attention, but when I don't post, false accusations and allusions are made about why I'm not engaging in the discussion, or even "ignoring" it. Can we drop the rhetoric please? Now, putting aside SoM's rude "No no and no" retort, the issue of what constitutes "unnecessary detail or information" is subjective, and obviously at the heart of the matter. I do not think that elaborating on Wolverine's powers, particularly the depth of his healing factor and senses, is unreasonable or unnecessary. As for the different continuities of the character across different media, the entry only has to deal mainly with the comics version, hence the title of the page. How characters appear differently when adapted to other media is something that if desired, can be briefly mentioned in sections on those adapatations, which tends to be the M.O. when you look at entries for other comics characters. We don't need to incorporate three or five sets into the main one. As for hair, it continues to grow when left unchecked. The fact that Wolvie's not only stops when it reaches a pre-determined stage, as if part of his healing factor, and that his sideburns also do, but not his beard or mustache, is not normal, and is why I mentioned it. I can conceivably concede that perhaps that paragraph, out of all of them, is not the *most* relevant to his powers. The rest, however, is dead-on relevant because it details his signature powers. Nightscream 7.20.05. 10:56am EST

No one believes you, Nightscream. You are well aware of where the discussion is taking place and what is being said. The village pump section links here. Notes were posted on your talk page directing you here. Do you take everyone for a chump? SoM is not the one who is distorting here, you are. ScifiterX 22:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

No. It is *you* who doesn't believe me, not "no one" and this is obviously influenced by a personal bias against me. Considering that I'm still learning how to use WP's different utilities and to keep track of the different sections and pages wouldn't allow you to attack me, so you ignore that possibility, and simply go with the one that allows you to assume the worst, and pretend that this idea of me lying for some reason is somehow a proven fact, rather than just your self-serving vitriol, and then convince yourself of the delusional idea that this is somehow not an insult on your part. Again, if what's being said about my not engaging in discussion isn't true, then why, pray tell, am I now doing so? The discussion is taking place here in many different sections with different headings, which is why figuring out where the "true" conversation is was somewhat difficult. Your continued accusations say more about your own inability to regard anyone who disagrees with you with anything other than malice than they do about me, and are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Why it doesn't occur to you that a relatively new user to Wikipedia might have difficulty navigating through it, I don't know, but your Argument from Incredulity doesn't disprove it. Nightscream 7.21.05. 1:13am EST.

Requests For Comment

Thanks for responding to our request for comment. What we are seeking to achieve is a consensual position on how the article Wolverine (comics) covers the character's powers. We basically have two versions, the Current Edit and Nightscream's New Edit. Please could you read through the two edits, and also the discussion and comments by the page editors, and then comment below. Once again, thank you for your time. Hiding 19:17, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty much with SoM on this. Early on GingerM also voiced this position it you look up top.ScifiterX 20:47, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I also agree with SoM on this.T-1000 21:41, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Nightscream has reverted the entry back to his version about half a dozen times since the last post on here. Yet, he isn't making anymore comments and seems to be ignoring this discussion at this point. ScifiterX 07:49, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

That last one was his sixth revert in 24 hours - I reported him for the 3RR breach after the fourth, and added his two most recent just there, but he still hasn't been blocked yet. - SoM 10:39, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
3RR breach? 3 Revert Rule Breach? I am not sure I follow. Would it help if others reported him also? ScifiterX 12:58, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
No, although if you really wanted to, you could leave a comment I suppose @ WP:AN/3RR#User:Nightscream. Be better if you could find an admin to do the blocking (see Special:Ipblocklist before you do, oc.) - SoM 13:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Hi. I've come in from RFC. Looking at the two versions, and at the comments/discussions, I find the argument that the section needs to be limited only to what is common to 5 continuities (Comic 1, Comic 2, Movies, Animated Series, Evolution) a compelling one. In addition, I think that it's good to take into consideration who the target audience is. Do you want a crufty article that goes into a level of detail where it's covering inconsistencies between comics written two or three decades ago and only known to, and likely of interest to, hardcore fans, or do you want something that fits a more "traditional" encyclopedia format, of giving a summary of key information to the interested but uninformed neophyte or passer-by? Typically, articles go for the latter. As one of those neophytes/passers-by, I'm going to say that the Current Version was the better of the two as far as not overwhelming me with a level of detail I neither wanted to know nor fully understood. The consensus regarding it is a good consensus. The Literate Engineer 17:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
    • The voice of reason, how sweet it sounds! ScifiterX 07:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi I just dropped in on this page after seeing the disagreement mentioned on the Village Pump. To be honest, I fail to see the problem with including excruciating detail on Wolverine's powers and comparisons between the different sources, as long as there is no question about the accuracy of these details (i.e. only include information that appeared in the actual sources, being careful to omit fan speculation). Regarding accessibility for a general reader, the right thing is to use an Inverted pyramid style: begin with a quick and general overview, and then go into more detail, possibly on a separate Abilities of Wolverine (comics) page if it gets too long here. —Steven G. Johnson 22:12, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know where the person above me is coming from on this. What Nightscream was adding was non NPOV opinion and his personal conjecture on a fictional character, not detail of any sort of objectively evaluated nature. Nightscream also likes to say in 3 paragraphs what could easily said in one sentence and goes out of his way to be verbose (and no I am not attacking him, I am just being frank). But that's just me. Obviously someone agrees or he would not have been blocked. Anything I can do to help with the process just let me know. ScifiterX 07:09, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

There is no personal conjecture or opinion in my edit. If there is, then please show me where it is. And no, I don't think that opining that my version is too verbose is an attack, since that's a perfectly legitimate aspect of this discussion. However, you again distort the truth with your comment about my being blocked. I wasn't blocked because someone agreed with you on whether my version was verbose or NPOV. I was blocked because I violated the 3R rule, for which I take responsibility. The 3R rule and your opinion of the verbosity of the edit are two different things that have nothing to do with one another. Nightscream 7.21.05. 1:29am EST