Talk:Magik (Illyana Rasputina)

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

Lesbian?[edit]

There isn't any evidence that Illyana had a crush on Kitty, is there? Any real evidence, that is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.53.77 (talk) 01:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. There isn't. It's either someone projecting themselves or a wishful fantasy of theirs onto a comic book character. There was very little evidence of Illyana having romantic feelings for anyone at any point in her appearances, even when she temporarily absorbed the powers of the Enchantress during the Asgardian Wars. Angel the Techrat 02:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For sake of implication, she showed a pretty clear preference for guys over girls in the third New Mutants' annual (when the team was on a beach in Rio and admiring the various half-naked people around them), nor did she seem all that receptive to Gosamyr's power of attraction (circa New Mutants #66-69). And her relationship with Kitty has always been explicitly explained as a function of the fact that Kitty was the first and only person to really accept her without fear or suspicion after her return from Limbo. So there's definitely very little to suggest she's either bi or lesbian, and circumstantial evidence to suggest she's straight. 72.68.108.233 (talk) 04:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Extra note - in New Mutants #54, she refers to Thunderbird as a hottie, and in New Mutants #57, she complains that all the boys on the team are either too young and/or already taken, and voices a wish that they would recruit more hot guys. 72.76.170.250 (talk) 20:57, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: In AMAZING HEROES 1984 SPECIAL PREVIEW (p. 132) Chris Claremont discusses plans for a graphic novel "True Friends" starring Kitty and Illyana where they "discover the length and breadth of their friendship. There's also magic and sex and violence." The graphic novel was scheduled for 1984, but never appeared. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.172.195.87 (talk) 07:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Armor for Anyone?[edit]

I'm not too sure about the mystical armor being able to just appear on anyone who rules Limbo. Belasco never had armor when he ruled Limbo. Thus, how can Doctor Doom seem to know so much about it when it was only a manifestation of Illyana up to that point? I always saw the armor as a mutant manifestation anyway, similar to Illyana's brother's mutation. Artemisboy (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Illyana's armor is NOT a part of her mutant powers. This is clear because the armor HAS been transferred to Kitty numerous times (when Illyana was attacked by the Beyonder in New Mutants #38 the Soul Sword comes to Kitty and Kitty gains the armor as well, in the Excalibur vol. 1 83-85 after Illyana is "dead"). As for Doom's knowledge of Illyana, well Doom has shown a wide knowledge of Limbo and actually tried to seize control of Limbo in Excalibur vol. 1 issues 37-39. (CureWhite (talk) 14:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Beatrix Medallion/bloodstones[edit]

OK, first the original wording was a little awkward, so I changed it to make it easier to read. Second, I added the name of the "bloodstone amulet". It was called the Beatrix Medallion. Oh yeah and if you want a reference for the name of the amulet, check out New Mutants vol. 1 issue #36 page 10. It was probably named before that, but it was the easiest comic for me to find at the moment. (76.23.115.72 (talk) 08:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Created by...[edit]

If she first appeared in Giant-Sized X-Men #1 then by what rationale can one say that Chris Claremont created her? MultipleTom (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, she appeared for all of like 3 panels in that particular issue, more as "Peter's sister" than any actual development or concept. So one could theoretically point out that every single thing we know about her other than the fact that she was Peter's little sister stems from stories Claremont wrote as opposed to Len Wein's use of her as a plot trigger and throwaway element of Colossus' backstory. But yes, technically speaking, Len Wein IS her official creator, and should probably be listed as such. Especially when Claremont himself has suggested in the past that Len Wein doesn't get enough credit for his contributions to the X-Men mythos. 72.68.108.233 (talk) 04:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like we're just taking wild guesses as to who created her, both from the posts above and the fact that the article gives conflicting creator credits, none of them with any source. So I've taken down the creator credits until we get some actual information on the subject.--NukeofEarl (talk) 02:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know who created her by my guess is Chris Claremont along with whoever the artist was. Someone needs to find this out, verify it and add it to this page.

Fluffyroll11 (talk) 06:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Fictional character biography" section[edit]

I just did a pass through this section to clean up some grammatical issues. Feels like it could use some work, it reads kind of choppy compared to the bios for other Marvel heroes, like Wolverine's. May just need some sentence restructuring for some parts to better indicate which story arc is being discussed. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the storylines to try and work on it myself. HMS Werewolf (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 October 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. This interesting discussion is about a month old and has been relisted three times, so since I'm not an admin, I will close it without prejudice toward further discussion about the best titles for these articles. The first choice I find to be wanting and not in accord with the comics naming convention, which states that when there are two characters with the same codename, the title should follow the Codename (Character name) format. So the first move will be to Magik (Illyana Rasputin), and I shall redirect Magik (Amanda Sefton) to that character's article. The second move will be made as proposed, because it follows the naming convention for comics disambiguation. The only time more precision is required is if a codename, character name or series title is used by two different publications. Since the "Magik" name is used only by Marvel comics, the "(comics)" qualifier is as precise as it needs to be. Admittedly, this discussion yields little agreement, so I fell back on the community consensus in the naming convention. If that consensus needs to be changed, then a discussion on the guideline's talk page should be opened. Happy Holidays to all! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  04:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

– This article is about the comic book character, and Magik (Illyana and Storm) is about the comic book publication when this character was first named "Magik". According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics), the "(comics)" DAB should be used for publications. Cambalachero (talk) 13:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:32, 7 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 16:09, 14 November 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:13, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: Bone (comics) is a notable precedent. ToThAc (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 1st as eminently sensible. Move 2nd to Magik (comic book), per The Walking Dead (comic book) and a bunch of others. This would reflect the rather painstaking reform discussions done at MOS:COMICS and WP:NCCOMICS over the last year or two. But "Magic (comics)" shoudn't be used for either, since it's ambiguous; redirect that to the character article, since the character is more notable that the short-lived series.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  20:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC); revised 16:27, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose' - If we were do a name change for that character, it would have to be for the fact that they have their own comic book like Wolverine and Iceman. What is the motive here? --Rtkat3 (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note that the protagonist of Magik (Illyana and Storm) is this character, it's not some unrelated character also named "Magik". The girl in the cover included in that article may not have the modern character design, but it is her, Illyana Rasputin. --Cambalachero (talk) 00:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • LOL! And Rtkat3's rationale is made-up nonsense, anyway. There is no such rule. We could have a character article for any reason that surmounted WP:GNG.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  16:27, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose first move to Magik (X-Men), oppose second leave as is; the second is obviously ambiguous so why mess up a perfectly good title? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Parsing that as "oppose first, and move to Magik (X-Men) instead", that would be even worse over-disambiguation of the character article than Magik (comics). We just don't do that. The second is not a "perfectly good title"; Magik is not an "Illyana and Storm" it's a comic [book]. "Illyana and Storm" (i.e., disambiguation by characters who are not even unique to the work) is not how we do disambiguation either.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  16:27, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • "X-Men" is not a good DAB, as both the character and the comic book are related to the X-Men. Cambalachero (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No possibly not, but the whole titling of comics is a disaster area. In any case oppose second, it's ambiguous. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am somewhat familiar with the X-Men Comics. There are actually two X-Men characters known as "Magik". The original was Illyana Rasputin. Following her death (she was later resurrected), the codename and the associated control of Limbo was claimed by the witch Amanda Sefton. Amanda was the star of the mini-series "X-Men: Magik" (4 issues, December, 2000-March, 2001). Both characters can be described as "Magik (character)". Dimadick (talk) 01:39, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge the two articles into Magik (comics). The (Illyana and Storm) article is a plot dump and only references the work itself. Move the real world info (creator names) to the character article. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:52, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose second - Some folks here are rather confused about the comic book series. Cambalachero: Illyana is arguably the protagonist, but the star of Magik (Illyana and Storm) is, as the title says, both Illyana and Storm. Also, in the case of the comic book series, "Magik" is strictly part of the title, not the character. At the time that series was published, Illyana Rasputin was simply Illyana Rasputin. She wasn't assigned the name Magik until later. SMcCandlish: "(Illyana and Storm)" is not a disambiguation; as noted in the article, it's part of the title of the work. As In ictu oculi said, "Magik (Illyana and Storm)" is a straightforward, natural location for the article; it's the title of the subject, pure and simple.--NukeofEarl (talk) 19:12, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both' But must rename the first because it is ambiguous; Oppose the second; that fails WP:PRECISE and makes use of ambiguous disambiguation, so it fails policy. Oppose the first; there are multiple characters called "Magik", there's a hatnote indicating that already, so that also fails WP:PRECISE and thus fails policy. Instead, rename this to Illyana Rasputina per WP:NATURALDAB -- 70.51.45.76 (talk) 04:00, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Let me remind you people that the proposed move is based on policy, made specifically for the comic books. It is set there that "(comics)" is for publications, not for characters. It is basically spelled out in that page. As for Amanda Sefton, she is not relevant for this discussion. There are superhero identities that are held by many people at equally long runs (such as Flash, being Jay Garrick, Wally West, Barry Allen and others), and a superhero identity that is held by just one guy, except for a minor exception here and there (Batman is Bruce Wayne, notwithstanding Dick Grayson and Jean Paul Valley). Magik is the second case. Cambalachero (talk) 12:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • The WP:LOCALCONSENSUS of WPCOMICS does not override the general WP:POLICY of WP:PRECISE so the requested title fails policy. NC-COMICS is a guideline, while WP:PRECISE is a policy. Overrinding WP:PRECISE would require a WP:IAR determination to ignore policy in favor of localconsensus instead. -- 70.51.45.76 (talk) 06:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • If Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics) is a Wikipedia guideline, it's because it has general consensus in all of wikipedia, not just a project. Cambalachero (talk) 14:13, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • See WP:POLICY where the policies should be generally applied. So policies override guidelines. NC-COMICS is a guideline, so is overridden by WP:AT of which PRECISE is part of. -- 70.51.45.76 (talk) 06:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. PRECISE is a vague and general idea, while NC-COMICS addresses this naming issue in a direct and topic-specific manner. So, it is the one we should follow, regardless of the distinction between "policies" and "guidelines". Cambalachero (talk) 12:24, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Magik_(Illyana_Rasputina)&oldid=1208696037"