Talk:Astonishing X-Men

Collected Editions section confusing

Does anyone else think that the collected editions section is a little confusing and hard to discern information from? It just looks like a lot of numbers. Would it be better off in a table? Air12345 (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Air12345

Storyline breakdown

I think a break down of the storylines of AXMv3 would be helpful for readers of this page.

Continuity?

I'm quite confused about how Astonishing X-men fits in the Earth 616 continuity. Does anyone have any information concerning this? Especially since House of M isn't mentioned in any of the issues.

Issues 1-12 take place before House of M, issue 13 is the first to take place afterwards. That's why there are only a few students left at Xavier's. Iron Ghost 23:03, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that explains the first few. but recent issues don't fit into 616 at all, seeing as Cyclops still has his powers. Is this world extremely similar to the 616 universe or is it the 616 universe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.206.136.69 (talk) 10:33, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

It is the 616 universe. And Cyclops is one of the mutants who retains his powers post-Decimation. --Venomaru 2.0 01:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Cyclops' "now you see them, now you don't" powers were taken away by Emma Frost, not Decimation. Unless he gets his powers back soon, this will no doubt be taken into account the next time the other X-Men comics have a "catch-up" issue (like the aforementioned AXM #13, and its relationship to House of M). Remember, comics have these confusing "this is coming out at the same time as/after this other thing, but is actually set before it" moments all the time, which then require "catch-ups" later on. At the moment, all the Spider-Man titles are about a year behind Daredevil, which established a while ago that the Kingpin is away from New York and in Europe, and won't be back for some time, and that he is most certainly not in New York and ordering assassinations on Peter's loved ones. These things just happen sometimes. Also remember, just because a writer is coming up with his own stories and only occassionally mentioning inter-comic continuity, rather than slavishly relying on it, does not make a comic "out of continuity". --Jayunderscorezero 18:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Volume 3 hardcover editions?

Astonishing X-Men (Volume 3, written by Joss Whedon) had two different hardcover editions produced by Marvel publishing, released only a month apart and identically priced (but covering the same story arcs- Gifted and Dangerous)[1][2]. Does anyone know why they did this, and what, aside from the covers, the differences between the books would be?--Ryan! 20:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

One of the editions has Joss Whedon's name in very big yellow letters [3]. My only guess would be that this is to attract fans of Whedon who wouldn't ordinarily read comics. Iron Ghost 00:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

List of Members

I know it's a minor thing, but I think Lockheed should be kept in the list of active members. Yeah, he's a dragon, but he's a character with a lot of history. And he was present in both story arcs (e.g., he was the one who burned Ord's face in issue #2). So, I think he should stay.

Personally, I see Lockheed as more of a recurring character than a team member, in which case I think he would derserve a part in the article, but not on the team roster. but that might be more trouble than it's worth. --Silver lode 23:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

What about Armor? She has been a major character in Astonishing X-Men since 'Gifted'; does she get a mention in the list of major characters? Certainly, it seems she has played a bigger role than Lockheed. Jayunderscorezero 14:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Trivia section

I deleted the mention in the trivia section of the recurring jokes about Wolverine's love of beer. It's cute and all, but it's not really trivia. You could add a similar entry about any of the recurring jokes in the series -- about Emma's scanty costume, or Kitty and Peter's long-delayed copulation, or whatever. There's no reason to privilege one set of jokes over another. And anyway, the rest of the trivia section contains information that you couldn't glean from simply reading the books yourself. --Vulgar Pragmatist 17:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Makeover

Rewrote article so as to ensure that it appears respectable. Please reference the plot summary, the criticism section and every other section that there is. Always write in the past tense. They might be ongoing but in ten months from now they would be a part of the past but the article will still remain the same. Avoid writing with a point of view. No opinions should be present. Do not write summaries issue by issue. Wikipedia is not advertisement and we're not here to praise or damn something. We're here to solely give out information. Zuracech lordum 20:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Much of this article takes a pretty fawning tone, which isn't that unusual with Joss Whedon fans, but it definitely doesn't avoid a point of viewSlamBurger (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Astonishing19.jpg

Image:Astonishing19.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Astonishing X-Men #25

I adjusted the "Second Stage" segment of the page for the new information on Issue 25 on the July previews page. SoulReaverDan (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Solicitations are not reliable sources. Rau's Speak Page 01:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Astonishing X-Men Second Stage

Do they really need to rename it after Josh Whedon and John Cassady left? becuase Detective comics would serously on like 500 stage —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.24.88 (talk) 09:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Second Stage is simply the production title, it wont change on the actual issues. Rau's Speak Page 17:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Continuity Placement of "Torn" and "Unstoppable"

Where do the story arcs Torn and unstoppable fit into marvel continuity? Torn flows directly into Unstoppable so all twelve issues take place within the same period of time but where does it fit. In AXM #13 Maria Hill is still director of SHIELD and it is implied that the Decimation had just occurred. Therefore placing the story before civil war. But Kitty appears in the "Blinded by the Light" story arc in X-Men vol. 2 which takes place after Civil War. Giant-Size AXm doesn't help as Captain America is not present nor are any of the post-civil War recruits. We know that the Torn/Unstoppable arc wasn't during civil war as Scott, Emma and Hank were all part of the X-Men: Civil War storyline. The best assumption is that the Story takes place pre-civil war and the Kitty in Blinded by the light is a skrull/clone/hallucination/temporal displaced/Earth 2/counter earth or just continuity error. Any other thoughts? --76.71.46.168 (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Um... I had some continuity issues with it as well. The same character can (and will) appear in multiple books at the same time. Look at Spider-Man, Wolverine, Iron Man, they have all appeared in two or more series at the same time in different situations. For example, while the Avengers were in Japan, all three of those mentioned appeared where they were before the Avengers went to Japan. They all did not magically appear(no pun intended) in Japan at the start of one issue. My guess is that because of the delays that must come with Joss Whedon, those arcs must take place over the course of Decimation, Civil War, Endangered Species, Messiah Complex, and World War Hulk. They could have been in space longer than it seemed. If they do explain it, great, if not, it doesn't matter much. But, they do take place before Divided We Stand, as in Uncanny X-Men #495 (first issue of DWS) they mention that Peter is without Kitty (do not remember exact wording). Does this help? I think I had a brain fart. Rau's Speak Page 00:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

There's little point in trying to nail down AXM's continuity. If you check the page, they state that Joss decided to write AXM mostly without regards to larger continuity, so certainly trying to figure out where it fits based on Cyclops/Emma/Wolverine (haven't we learned our lesson already with him?) is futile, since it doesn't matter much to Marvel and the characters have been everywhere, no matter where they are or what they're doing. Kitty is the only appropriate gauge and she only nails down where AXM ends. So basically AXM concludes before Messiah Complex and started after New X-Men. My guess for Torn and Unstoppable is that they occur DIRECTLY between Blinded by the Light and Messiah Complex (which in itself is impossible, since the big energy surge at the end of Blinded is probably the malfunction caused by the baby's birth in Messiah.Luminum (talk) 06:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

We know that the first two arcs take place between the end of New X-Men and House of M that is plain. As for how much time passes between Gifted and Dangerous that is a mystery. Basically Whether Dangerous is before or after Wolverine Enemy of the State is the only question. Each of the two story lines takes place over a day or two so they could fit between other stories. Torn is about a day while unstoppable is I guess a week. I think pre-civil War is the best placement as it explains why Spider-Man, Iron Man, Sentry and Doctor Strange are all in the same room without any mention of the civil war. Cap Luke and Jessica must have been taking a sick day. IN addition storm is still with the X-Men suggesting it is before her marriage at the start of the civil war. The only othre clue is that Warpath is present indicating it is after Uncanny X-Men #475. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.46.168 (talk) 21:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Unstoppable can't be before Civil War because Spider-Man says "all these superheroes in one room not civilly warring..." If you're trying to nail down its placement for the record's sake then it's an impossibility because the run just adapted as large events effected the Marvel universe, despite the fact that Whedon didn't involve major continuity changes...just minor indications of them. So I guess beyond some fun discussion, trying to pinpoint where it fits is rather pointless. Just chalk it up to poor editing and a unique continuity situation granted to Whedon by Quesada.Luminum (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Yea, it is very pointless. Cyclops never stoped using his visor in the other series, only Astonishing. That's when I figured it was in it's own little pocket universe until it finished. Which at the end, the major issues had been addressed. (Like his visor, and Kitty's disappearance) Rau's Speak Page 22:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 15:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I've done the assessment - it needs a lot more references and doesn't cover the creative side of things (it is mainly plot so needs a lot more out-of-universe material). (Emperor (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2009 (UTC))

Motion Comic

There should probably be a section for the Volume 3 motion comic. Also, the External Link for the animated issue 1 goes to a page that doesn't have the video- it was probably removed when the real motion comic came out. 129.2.170.50 (talk) 04:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI: As of this date the first 5 "motion comic" episodes of Gifted is being officially hosted at this link on Hulu. Looks like they started around the tail end of October and have been releasing a new episode every couple weeks. 66.102.204.126 (talk) 09:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Is there any more info than what the page says right now on the motion comics? Just noticed them on Netflix a week or so ago, but they've only got it up to episode 5 or 6 (not sure where in comics it would be)Shardok (talk) 03:25, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Astonishing X-Men. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070623103614/http://www.newsarama.com/Comic-Con_07/Marvel/AXMEllis.html to http://www.newsarama.com/Comic-Con_07/Marvel/AXMEllis.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Astonishing X-Men. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120611140149/http://uk.comics.ign.com/articles/709/709053p1.html to http://uk.comics.ign.com/articles/709/709053p1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)