Talk:Asteroid M

Ultimate Asteroid M

There should be a section for Asteroid M in the Ultimate universe. I don't have those comics so if someone could make the section t'would be great.

My Contributions

Well, I expanded the Appearances in Other Media section. Added two pics and did some minor clean up of the article to make it look more presentable. Phunbot 04:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Asteroidm1.jpg

Image:Asteroidm1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Asteroidm1.jpg

Image:Asteroidm1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Anya's Grave

I have done some clean-up, but I haven't removed the tag. I think some of the plots, especially in the other versions section, are still too detailed. I noticed, however, that at the end of the Video Games paragraph there is a reference to Asteroid M being geosynchronically positioned above "Anya's Grave". This sounds like an important feature of the asteroid, but it is not mentioned anywhere earlier in the article. Who was Anya? Why has Magneto positioned the asteroid above her grave? Which of the four versions of the base were thusly positioned? If anyone knows the answers to these questions, I think that information should be added. - Geoffg (talk) 08:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• I've never actually seen this mentioned in canon, so it might be fanon. In X-Men vol. 2 #1, it's mentioned that the 3rd Asteroid M is geosynchronous above the Soviet Union, and I think fans have just assumed it's over Anya's grave, which would be in present-day Ukraine. Anya was Magneto's first daughter; there's a little more info about her death on Magneto's page. 146.57.22.14 (talk) 23:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Where do the 4th and 5th versions actually come from?

After the third, there's no mention of Asteroid M being rebuilt. It's like the writer's just wanted to pull it out of nowhere.24.190.34.219 (talk) 03:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

• Xorneto makes the fourth one, I believe. As for the fifth, the second was the only one that wasn't completely annihilated, so it's presumably that one pieced together somehow. Or it might be a continuity error. 146.57.22.14 (talk) 23:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, was wondering about the 4th one. About the 5th one, a new interview up has been put up at CBR:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22961

"Will it be explained, at some point, how Asteroid M made it to the bottom on the Pacific Ocean? I thought it blew up in the sun at the end of Morrison's “Planet X?”"

NICK LOWE: It’ll be explained right here! There has been more than one Asteroid M. In fact, there has been at least three of these Asteroid M’s (depending on if you consider a rebuilt Asteroid M to be a new one). This is the first Asteroid M (or at least most of the first one).

Basically they say that the Utopia Asteroid M is the remains of the original Asteroid M. 24.190.34.219 (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"Senior Members"

Whoever's added the "senior member" status to the list of X-Men members residing on Utopia, I think the term you're looking for is "core member," the term Marvel has been using. However, even this term has been used in various ways. In addition to the use noted on this page--people who've attended the X-Men's "core members meetings" (the attendance of which has varied from small groups in Uncanny X-Men issues [Cyclops, Emma, Xavier, Magneto, Dr. Nemesis, Namor, etc.] to the very large group in Nation X #1)--it has been used in the following ways by Marvel:

1.) This quotation from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z, vol. 13 (2010) hardcover uses "core X-Men" as a synonym for "full X-Men members" (as opposed to people like Wolfsbane, who was just a member of the secret X-Force squad; Kavita Rao, who's just an X-Club member; and Loa, who's just a member of the training squad): "The X-Men-in-Training, X-Force and X-Club teams affiliated with the X-Men all currently remain active. While some members of these sub-groups have also served with the core X-Men, others have not."

2.) Meanwhile, this quotation from Official Index to the Marvel Universe #13 (2010) seems to use "core group" in a manner somewhat similar to how "senior member" is used on this page, but it's not very well defined: "When the X-Men re-form following their dissolution in X[-Men] #207, '08, their structure is much looser: although the 'core group' of team members remain, others now routinely come and go on an as-needed basis: students, former allies and acquaintances, all offered sanctuary in San Francisco, briefly join or aid the team on specific missions--and all are considered 'X-Men.' For the Index's purposes, however, we will only list the core group as feature characters, and the rotating cast will be listed as supporting characters."

The way this senior/core membership status has been assigned on this page is pretty arbitrary/random, so which of the above meanings of the term should be used? Cannonball, Warpath, Hepzibah, and Armor were all full members before the team re-formed in San Francisco, so why aren't they listed as "senior" members? Dazzler, Karma, Magik, Magma, Mirage, Northstar, Pixie, Sunspot, X-23, Danger, Domino, Warlock, Gambit, Boom-Boom, Husk, and Cypher are all full members, not just sub-group members, so should they be listed as core members as well? My personal preference would probably just be to leave senior/core member status off of the list altogether--or at least come to a consensus about what it means and then be consistent in marking it--but what does everyone else think? DeadpoolRP (talk) 15:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I've removed it, it's just not necessary, and as you've said, just confusing because it changes based on the issue and the mission.68.55.153.254 (talk) 22:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)