Jump to content

Talk:Nico Minoru

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evidence against Nico and Victor having had Sex as of 11/25/06

[edit]

Before someomne tries to revert it, I need to point out several points of information.

Firstly: From Brian K. Vaughan Himself

Who said the kids had sex?!?! Get your mind out of the gutter!

Secondly, the citation made to the supposd inuendo refers not to any sexual practive, but to this image from #19, as well is the context of the line sighted earlier (see History). Nico putting a halt to their relationship before it really starts.

To prove a physical relationship, it would require far more proof. -- Majin Gojira 13:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hands and mouths work pretty well. Teenagers do that stuff. No evidence for sex. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 15:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bahahahaha. Good lord, you people won't be happy until they actually show him putting his penis inside her. Newsflash, this is still an all ages book, so they can't just come right out and say it, but everything Vaughn put in there made it very clear they did it. "Firstly", anyone can tell that Vaughn was being sarcastic in that quote. "Secondly", anyone with half a brain could tell you that scene which you reference would take place AFTER the act, hence why they were so damn awkward with each other. Anyone who's had slightly regrettable sex can tell you that scene is very truthful. The "liked you better when saying to go slow" line was clearly in reference to the act, yet again. I don't know where you ever learned sex ed, but really, get your minds out of the uber-christian ideal and into the real world. Kids are having sex younger and younger, and with Nico's attitude recently, it was only a matter of time.172.191.111.214 02:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. And you rely on belittiling your opponents with strawman arguments. Grow up and get a spine, I don't have time for your insesent assertions without supporting evidence. Furthermore, the problem could be solved if an issue related to sex arises and someone asks them if they did it or not. Until such a time, we cannot assume anything.
  2. He does enjoy toying with people, but gusing someone's motives is an impotent gesture.
  3. Anyone with half a brain knows better than to rely on baseless insults in a legitmate debate. What are you, 12?
  4. The fact that they were fully clothed and that there can be sexual acts without full intercourse means nothing to you? We live in a culture where Oral Sex doens't count as true sex in certain american cultureal definitions. Unless you have magical proof of vaginal intercourse, you've got nothing.
  5. Because they couldn't possibly have been kissing, fondeling or dry humping. Victor Mancha is a self professed "newbie" (IE: Virgin) at relationships, and you really think he bedded Nico in one night?! Remember, he's not 16, he's only a few years old (Vol 2. #7).
  6. Because it must be full vaginal sex. Sexual acts (oral sex, "dry-humping", heavy petting, fondeling, etc) just don't cut it. This is really showing how little you know about sex. That's fangirl mentality, the kind that sees Buttsex in Subtext. Wikipedia is not about Subtext.
  7. Blatant misrepresentation. The line is in taken out of context. She is telling him to slow down their relationship from where it was, it is not a reference to the act of vaginal intercourse.
  8. Look, more baseless insults!
  9. If you had even bothered to look at my profile, you would know I'm a card carrying member of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy. Another thing your totally off-base on. That's three in a row. You've officially failed at Insulting People on the Internet.
  10. Yet, her dream in the most recent issue references only "Kissing" and not sex. A great opportunity for a subtle reference to a sex act and it fails horribly. [1][2] Page 2 is especially enlightening, now isn't it?
  11. Your interpretations mean nothing, deal with it. The Null hypothesis is the base hypothesis. And do not edit the article again until this debate is resolved. If you do, I will implement countermeasures. -- Majin Gojira 05:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gojira: Please do not insert your comments into other editors'. I have tried as best I could to retain your intent by numbering the individual responses. Please change it if you desire to better reflect your intended message. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 08:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My appologies, I am more use to a different online debate style. -- Majin Gojira 13:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ya know, I was gonna try and counter all this yet again, but then I got to your last little one saying that other opinions don't matter, and I can see you're just not worth it. You're clearly someone who just gets off having what little power you have on here, and that's just sad. No wonder this site gets a bad rap. But I will say this, that dream outright called her a slut, and last I checked, girls don't get called sluts just for kissing other people. Anyway, you keep saying that you have the right to change it, well last I checked this was a public site, I can keep changing it to the equally vague "sleeping with" part someone else chose since they cleary spent a good amount of time that bed. 172.163.70.93 13:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No opinions matter, only citable fact. Find something that says the two characters had sexual intercourse, and we'll gladly accept the change; however, for now, consensus is that we do not have that information and should not add it to the article. While Wikipedia is open to all users, the ability to edit can be hampered or rescinded from those who edit Wikipedia irresponsibly, for instance repeatedly violating consensus. I understand that you feel very strongly about these fictional characters' sexual activity, but I ask that you please find another way to focus your creative energy. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 13:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Yet again"? All you've done is re-state your position. People in certain households are called sluts for such behavior (remember, her parents are highly Christian), and you're missing the important dialogue, she admits to only kissing the boys and nothing more. I am not talking about the right to edit something, I'm talking abput simple etiquite, which you've failed at (and I do little better in terms of tone). Provide direct evidence for your assertion beyond your interpretation of events and behave rationally. -- Majin Gojira 13:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)*[reply]
Man, Comparing my authoritatian reply with Chris well worded, subtler response, I really do come off like a jerk, don't I? Step back. Calm it down. -- Majin Gojira 13:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't base your arguments solely on your interpretation of events. If Vaughn or Whedon ever publicly say that Victor directly uploaded into her, that's fine, but until then, the best we can assume is some poorly programmed cunnilingus and some awkward digital stimulation, and the best we can claim is a phsyical relationship because that's all that deliberately has been made clear. It doesn't matter how much regrettable sex you've had; all that has been established is a vague physical relationship. Finally, don't be a dick.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 08:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Grimm?

[edit]

In an interview with Newsarama [3], David Sexton referrs to Nico as 'Sister Grimm' instead of Nico. Perhaps we should add an "also known as Sister Grimm" to the start of the article? Ixistant 23:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Song references in spells

[edit]

Aside from Shine On, You Crazy Diamond, Float On is almost certainly a reference to the Modest Mouse song of that name. I don't recognize any more references (Some one-word spell names may have songs titled the same, but that'd probably be accidental) but I'd bet there's more and/or will be more. Just putting it out there that those should be mentioned too.

Mystic Arcana

[edit]

It was me who made the Mystic Arcana edit(s). Is it sufficient? I'd like to contribute more to Wikipedia. --58.168.229.179 07:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's appreciated, but it was a bit too long, so I cut it down.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man (talk) 15:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spells

[edit]

Did we get rid of Nico's list of spells? If so, why?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Luminum (talk • contribs) 06:07, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Staff of One limitations

[edit]

The sole demonstrated exception to this limitation is former runaway Alex Wilder. Alex used the Staff to cast a spell off-panel which bound Karolina's parents in power-dampening chains, and then used the same spell later on Karolina.[8] The reason for this exception is unrevealed; possibly Alex--a gifted strategist of exceptional intelligence--was simply able to find a way to overcome the weakness. I'm sure Vaughn said on a forum once that Alex was able to use the same spell twice because he'd read the Abstract and knew more about the Staff of One than Nico did. I don't have the link though, so I'm hesitant to edit that in. Ketsuban (is 1337) 23:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

[edit]

I figured I would explain the edits I just made as the reasons were rather long.

I fixed a lot of spelling errors in the text. I also removed the picture of the group flying, per Wiki guidelines: (Please see WP:NFCC concerning picture content. They must enhance understanding, not just decorate the page.) The image is decorative, since showing the group flying with her magic doesn't enhance the reader's understanding of how she casts spells or explain her relationships with the other characters or any of the major plotlines she was involved in.

The quote seems unnecessary, as it's more decorative and near fan-related rather than truly (and significantly) enhancing the reader's understanding of the character. I feel the page does a good enough job establishing her character and doesn't require a quote that includes Patriot, who goes unexplained.

There were two sections that were the same paragraph, so given that the events with the Witchbreaker are explained in detail, I shortened the paragraph in her powers section and gave the previous one an appropriate heading, as it marks a notable development in the character.

To whoever added the picture, again--promotional materials as they stand alone are not good references. I see that you tried to remedy this by leaving instructions that appear to validate that the picture is of Nico, but the reference is still shaky (as file names can always be named incorrectly). Until the picture is officially depicted as being Nico and even more so, when it is actually put into a kind of context (and not just a random picture), I recommend that we hold off on adding it.

Also, Sup3rior, a good way to avoid numerous and unnecessary saves is to hit "Preview Changes" on the edit page rather than saving and editing again and again. That way, one may view whether or not thumbnail size is appropriate and adjust accordingly and only resulting in one major change to the page in the logs. I hope that helps. :)

Those are my suggestions. Feel free to speak about them here.Luminum (talk) 07:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Quantifier

[edit]

"By the second series, Nico is the de facto leader of her unofficial and nameless superhero team, making her one of the few Japanese-American superhero team leaders."

One of the few Japanese-American Superhero team leaders where? In the US, in comics? on TV in media? Quantify it.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Nico Minoru. 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:

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) 21:55, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Appearances, Please

[edit]

One shouldn't have to sift through detailed explanations just to know what to read next. I know it gets pretty extensive with characters like Spider-Man, but this isn't one of those. Can we please just list her appearances in chronological order? Thetrellan (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nico_Minoru&oldid=1209085814"