Talk:Juggernaut (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Juggernaut (comics) article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

comics
Portal

This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.

B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

More information:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Related task forces (publisher):
	Marvel Comics work group

[edit] Paradox

Is it worth mentioning the comic book nerd paradox of "what would happen if the Unstoppable Juggernaut ran into the Unmoveable Blob? While most of us agree Jugernaut's magic power overrides the Blobs.... this paradox is often time used by X-Men buffs to define a super powered paradox.

Immoveable Blob, not Unmoveable. :) 192.249.47.11 15:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image of Juggernaut

That's a pretty lame picture of Juggernaut. I believe it would be worth considering obtaining a better one.

Remember the Picture of the Juggernaut before this one? Where he is on top of a car and is smashing it? There were mountains in the backround? Can we change it back to that one? That one is the best pic of the Juggernaut.

[edit] Unstoppable

I think if you are going to use a term like "Finally, while moving, he could, essentially, not be stopped" a brief discription of those circumstances in which that statement has not been true should be included. ie by an Apocalypse enhanced Hulk as War II. This has been done in other charecter discriptions notably The Blob.

In the X-men 3 movie it was stated that once he has any momentum, nothing will be able to stop him. What do you suppose will happen if Juggernaut should jump of a building? His momentum will be directed downwards. Will the earth be able to stop him from falling? Just a thought. 155.232.128.10 08:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

--but he obviously can stop himself by refusing to walk or exert himself, it's just common sense. If he was shoved from the back and pushed forward, he can stop himself from moving. Jaybonaut 18:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

:True. Let me give you an example. I remember a scene where Storm pushed Juggernaut backwards. When that happened, he stopped himself easily. The end.--Oreichalcos (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Appearances in other media

The statement that his powers in X-Men: The Last Stand are nearly identical seem's stupid to me. He display's unstopability, but not nearly the range of strength, durability, stamina, or such that he has in the comics. I think it should be removed.67.48.102.11Juggy#3

The Juggernaut B*tch paragraph doesn't seem notable enough to be of mention here, it almost seems like some people just trying to "promote" their lame video. It's poorly worded too, please stop adding it over and over.

ElCapitanAmerica 21:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Just type in the title into google, its everywhere. I have nothing to do with that vid and yet i keep seeing it pop up all over the web. that's like not mentioning the Chuck Norris Facts on the chuck norris page. -(Brodey)

Let's see how well-known it is after a while. It's fairly new right now. --DrBat 23:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

i agree, not only is it lame but also not really informative in any way, keep removing it

Nobody is trying to "promote" anything here. It has become very popular and you've just been unfortunate not to have heard of it. - user:Madame Arsenic

It has has over 2 million views on YouTube alone. It's noteworthy

It is extremely notable, many, many people know the catchphrase "I'm the Juggernaut, bitch!" Just google it and see for yourself. Senner 22:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Well it would seem that small animation parody has received enough notoriety to receive the attention of Hollywood. As anyone who has seen X-men 3: The Last Stand will tell you, this infamous internet quote has made its way into mainstream film media. It is shown in a scene involving Kitty Pryde whilst stuck within the floor thanks the Kitty, Juggernaut shouts “Don’t you know who I am? I’m the Juggernaut, B*tch! Some might go far as to say that this is the sole purpose of juggernauts involvement with the film as far as I can tell he did little to nothing to progress the story - Peter Ryan

This video I think is worth mentioning its another internet meme right up there along with Numa Numa and the starwars kid I vote for a keep Xaios 07:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I also recommend giving this more mention. This, along with [Snakes on a Plane], is a clear example of internet culture making its way into mainstream culture. That is certainly noteworthy. The Taped Crusader 07:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't beleive people kept removing this mention from the page? "The Juggernaut bitch" became quite the internet phenom. Its even tributed in the latest film! Duhon

Yeah - I watched that and I was like "did they actually copy that? Wow - cool." GreenReaper 06:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

The original author should be alerted to the fact that 1. ebonics does not exist, ebonics was, nay, is, merely a feeble attempt to alleviate an academic ailment plaguing inner-city students, or more precisely, african american inner city students, by, in so many words, deeming their dialect as another language altogether. This is both utterly assinine and offensive. 2. Even if one could rationally apply such a label to urban vernacular, let me assure you this display of endless obscenities is not ebonics, urban dialect, or black dialect, and to give, or succumb to, the impression that our, at times, unconventional speech is simply obscenities and misogyny is offensive and ignorant. May I suggest the actual exploration of a culture and traits therein before speaking, mentioning, or attributing anything to said culture. Especially short-lived, antiquated, ignorant, foreign concotions which try to define said traits, i.e ebonics...

p.s. exploration of our culture does not include, BET, MTV 1 or 2, VH1, UPN, WB, or anything broadcast on television, radio, or produced in a studio... 68.48.90.208 08:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Employee 022784

This is great. So many people were complaining about having this in the page about how it's irrelevant and lame, but then it appears in the movie. They must be crying their eyes out

I agree. This is for all you dumbasses who said that the movie based on the Juggernaut wasn't important enough to put in this article. They put it in the fucking movie. You lose. Thanks --MadameArsenic 21:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

So that you know, someone has altered the film entry with a comment in such a way that normal frequenters can't edit it out. It basically tries to negate the article. Might want to check that out.

[edit] Exiled

Is this really notable enough to appear in the article? It's not really important enough for the characer, and it seems out of place next to the rest of the article's flow. --DrBat 22:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

i think its really funny, sorry to be the party pooper for elitist comicy convo but it really made me giggle and it is really popular online. i think it should have a meantion but im not going to go and cry if it doesnt lol

This article looks bad

"ultimate juggernaut"

"but has apparently left the brotherhood team for parts unknown." this is not correct juggernaut was imprisoned after ultimate war mini-series and escaped when Shield was transporting him

[edit] SHB pic

This Asamiya pic is awful, we cannot even see the character. I do not like the Miguire pic as well but even so, is much better than Asamiya's. —Lesfer ^(talk/@) 20:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Healing factor?

In an episode of the animated series, When Juggernaut is de-powered, Xavier sends the X-men to go and reclaim the ruby that powered Juggernaut in the first place to give him back his "superhuman healing abilities" so that he wouldn't die. Question is, think this can be counted as evidence for a healing factor? Should it be listed among his special abilities?

The animated series isn't part of mainstream Marvel continuity. I don't know if he possesses some form of accelerated healing powers. The picture in the article displaying the Juggernaut reduced to a living skeleton would imply that he does, but the villain in the picture with him is the demon D'spayre, who feeds psychically off of fear and..well despair. I don't have the issue in which the confrontation takes place but I believe that the Juggernaut's mind was being tampered with by D'spayre. I might be wrong, if I am then someone please let me know. Cases involving the Juggernaut being injured are few and far between. With the exception of his encounter with Onslaught, I'd never seen the Juggernaut sustain any injury. He's been injured since his depowerment but as to how quickly he heals, it's up in the air. It's something that hasn't really been focused on, at least not to my knowledge. Anything put in the article about a "healing factor" would probably be more speculation than anything else at this point. Odin's Beard 00:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

he did have a healing factor during his unstoppable juggernaut period, i can't recall exactly where the picture is from but i do believe i've seen it and it's not depicting a mental scene. In the first few issues of x-force, shatterstar cuts juggy up, most notably apparently putting out his eyes. He quickly heals. (shatterstar has mystical blades, so some sort of mystic attack may be the common ground for damaging cain) Impulse 02:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

That was from Juggernauts fight with X-Force, I believe it was X-Force #3. Shatterstar stabbed him in the eye, and within moments his eye was completly healed. It should also be mentioned that within his One-Shot, he was burned down to a skeleton and healed in moments.67.48.102.11Juggy#3

It was in X-Force #4, I found the old issue. The character, Syrin, managed to pull the Juggernaut's helmet off after Shatterstar used his swords to sever the mystical link binding his helmet to his armor. Shatterstar commented that his sword was forged by a combination of the science and magic found in the Mojoverse, then he started to cut up on the Juggernaut a bit and he did heal quickly. Odin's Beard 23:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Juggernaut flat-out states in that issue that the magic flowing through his viens heals him. It also shows blood flowing of his eye and then, in moments, a healed eye. I have a picture.204.110.228.254

I have a picture of Juggernaut, after getting stabbed in the eye by Shatterstar, discussing how the magic inside him protects *and heals* him, and showing him with a damaged eye that is healed as he states this. I'd upload it, but I don't know how to do so.24.31.244.43 19:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I have seen the fight with Juggernaut Vs D'Spayre. Yes he does feed off of despair and anger, but that powers up his magic. His skin was actually removed in that scene He used the god like powers he received from Juggernaut's anger and despair. D'Spayre wondered how he was still alive. He said "He still stands? He moves? How when there is nothing left?" This is proof that it was done to his body and not mind. Juggernaut then explains that there is something left: Hate. "Cause life is pain. Pain leads to despair. An' the only way to beat despair is through rage. And rage feeds The Juggernaut. Once The Juggernaut feels rage...nothing...of this or any world... NOTHING CAN STOP THE JUGGERNAUT!" So yes not only can The Juggernaut regenerate from nothing, but he is truly unstoppable. The Black Juggernaut 23:39 10, September 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Black Juggernaut (talk • contribs) 03:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is the first time I've seen a good picture on this article

All the other Juggernaut pics had some deficientcy in them. (Either he was throwing dirt in front of his face, or he was realy small in the pics).--P-Chan 22:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ya I have that issue, let's just say this--nothing can stop the Juggernaut. ;) Well, old school 'Naut anyway. 192.249.47.11 15:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Juggernaut pic vote

No one can seem to agree, so i think we should have a vote for the main pic. But instead of me just posting some pics, feel free to add your own and then we'll vote. (it's not on wiki but check this one out too.) Don't be afraid to post a pic in the gallery tag, and we can start the vote on Monday June, 12. Exvicious 21:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Juggsexcal.png (holding rock) --Facto 00:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Pat Lee Dstorres

As I've often had quoted at me, so I quote at you: m:Polls are evil.

And I've removed the gallery per WP:FU#Articlespaceonly.

Here's the criteria I use to determine SHB pics:

Follow the fair use criteria, especially the Images that cannot be fair use guidelines. These supersede all the following criteria. Also, source your images fully (including all applicable from issue/page/panel, scan source, web source) and give a fair use rationale.
Ensure that the picture clearly shows as much of the character as possible:
- The ideal image is a full-body, three-quarter picture of the character standing straight with no background, with a facing-the-camera or profile picture as the next-best.
- If a full-body shot is unavailable, the picture must show the whole of the head and torso (or the equivalent for non-humanoid characters).
- Visibly contorted poses should not be used under any circumstances.
- Pictures which hide significant areas the character in shadow should be avoided (exceptions apply only where the shadow is itself part of the character's look - e.g. Raven.), as should pictures where blur or distortion effects are applied.
- Colouring should be neutral - pictures which have a heavy colour cast, or otherwise depict the character with false colours should not be uploaded unless the cast has been removed first.
- Heavily stylised art should only be considered for use when the character is closely associated with the style to the exclusion of less extreme styles.
Pictures which have more characters and/or objects than the subject of the article should only be used if the subject is the most prominent object - editing the picture, by cropping, obscuring and/or painting out the other characters may help to ensure this.
If the character has a clearly-defined primary costume (e.g. Superman), a picture of this should be used. Otherwise, the most recent ongoing costume of the character should be used.

- SoM 04:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's great. I understand the guidelines, but how would you stop an edit war dispute without a vote. All that will happen is they'll keep switching until they break the 3RR or one of them gets bored. Exvicious 22:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

 Go on google and look there, they've got some good pics of juggernaut....go juggernaut.

[edit] Informal

I believe that the X-men: Evolution bit of the Television section is far too informal, this is the text:

Juggernaut also appeared in the X-Men: Evolution series, voiced by Paul Dobson. This version was Xavier's half-brother, a mutant whose powers were awakened by the Cyttorak gem. The gem was said to hold special properties that enhanced and evolved mutants. In this series, his strenth and intelligence are greatly underestimated. Sure, he can throw tanks and other vehicles around but that is the top level of brawn exhibited in the cartoons. Also, he speaks in a drawl that is associated with thick people. He does seem to be affected by pain but he normally shrugs off the blow and continues fighting. He is not by any means unmovable because he was blasted by Cyclops when he ripped of his visor and gave Juggernaut his full power. However, Juggernaut then waded through it after the first inital wave. This might mean that he is not impervious to attacks but instead adapts to and then develops a stronger defense to perils.

There's also a few misspellings in there. --Damuna 03:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I do not believe the external link "A complete Juggernaut Bio" which links to thejuggernaut.means.it is appropriate on this page. It is neither complete nor does it have any useful information not already on the wikipedia page (it is just 1 page of an incomplete biography with many advertisements). Instead I suggest "The Unstoppable Juggernaut Homepage" at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Neptune/7060/main.html. Despite whatever prejudices you may have about Geocities pages, I find this page to be surprisingly complete, not to mention fun to read. 129.97.233.57 21:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this statement; while the Unstoppable Juggernaut Homepage is a fan page and therefore biased, it does provide a huge wealth of information regarding his powers, his history, and his appearences, as well as multiple scans of comics in which he apppeared in. 24.31.243.245 (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Getting tired of this

I'm getting tired of reverting the anonymous edits of a user who insists on adding his biased origin of the Juggernaut, negatively slanted to make him appear worse than he really is.

The latest reversion can be seen here. [1] Examples include changing "Juggernaut underwent a crisis of conscience and joined the team" to "Juggernaut underwent a number of retcons which were used to help remake him into a heroic figure", and stuff like "In an extremely unusual turn for someone of Cain's nature, he immediately befriended people at the mansion as he'd never befriended people before" and "Cain and Xavier had a conversation in which they recounted their past in a way much different from previously shown, and based on these new revelations immediately reconsiled their longtime feud." --DrBat 21:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

ban him?Phoenix741 21:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Way too harsh for now. Nobody has even put a message on his talk page. If anything lets tell him first that his edits arnt right. Thefro552 22:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I was just about to say something about the person who keeps reverting to the same mistakes in the article and I see this. lol Before I edited anything I double checked to make sure it was accurate. Retcons were used and the Juggernaut hasn't ever befriended people like that. Those are both true so what is the dispute? Also before the edit the article it was very incomplete and had errors in it. Like under "Redemption" it said:

"Soon after, the Juggernaut accepted an offer from the Commission on Superhuman Activity to become their headhunter and, in exchange, was pardoned from his past crimes. However, he threw away his pardon soon after when Black Tom talked him into going back to being a mercenary with him."

That's wrong and I've seen people try to correct it at least 3 times before I did. Black Tom doesn't talk Juggernaut back into anything and Juggernaut was never pardoned. And none of that had anything to do with Juggernaut redeeming. Juggernaut only pretended to redeem to fool the government to become a better criminal. Not only is the info wrong but it's in the wrong section! If the article isn't supposed to be corrected shouldn't it be tagged? I would have spared myself the trouble of trying to fix it. --63.40.244.219

Juggernaut only pretended to redeem to fool the government to become a better criminal. Um, no. We saw his thought bubbles in X-Men Forever, and he wasn't planning on fooling them or using them for information. And Juggernaut has befriended people before. Black Tom, anyone?

Your edits are POV and poorly written. Regardless of what you think of Juggernaut's redemption, it's against wikipolicy to insert your opinions into articles. Please, leave it alone. --DrBat 11:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Juggernaut said flat out that he fooled the government with that trick. That's not opinion that's fact. [2] Before restoring the same bad edits please provide a referrence for "Soon after, the Juggernaut accepted an offer from the Commission on Superhuman Activity to become their headhunter and, in exchange, was pardoned from his past crimes. However, he threw away his pardon soon after when Black Tom talked him into going back to being a mercenary with him." This never happened. And you have the whole thing in the wrong bloody section. Luger1/63.40.244.219

He was lying to Cyclops in that scene. We saw his thought-bubbles in X-Men Forever. We know what he was thinking. He wasn't trying to fool anyone then. A throwaway comment isn't enough to retcon an entire miniseries. Sorry.

As for the "Threw away his pardon" bit... Put two and together. He got a pardon in X-Men Forever. Then, he was back to working with Black Tom in the Cyclops miniseries. Effectively throwing away his pardon.

And it's not in the wrong section; it was in X-Men Forever that he started to redeem himself. --DrBat 18:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"He was lying to Cyclops in that scene." Mate, now you're making things up. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can create your own imaginary version of it. Are you an article monitor? If you are you need to be cited. You block out information you personally don't like. And you must not like any stories of Juggernaut as a villain because the "Criminal Life" section is anorexic compared to the others. And that's where most of Juggernaut's biography is! One of the few villain stories allowed to be mentioned is the X-Force thing and that's called "one of the odder ones". That's POV. I hope you're not an authority and I think this is a waste of public space. If there is a real monitor here please handle anything else through private message. Luger1 22:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not making things up. We knew from his thought bubbles in X-Men Forever that he wasn't working with the government to fool them. Ergo, him claiming to do so would be a lie. There's no other possible explanation. It's that simple.

I've already stated how your edits are POV; you seem to be deliberately slanting the article to make Juggernaut appear to be more evil than he really is, and trying to debunk his redemption storyline by adding little notes such as "Cain Marko underwent a series of quite sudden and at times unexplainable changes," "In an extremely unusual turn for someone of Cain's personality," "after a number of shocking and previously unheard of revelations," ect ect, and in general criticisizing the storyline. --DrBat 23:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

First of all, the article has minimal references. I'm assuming that none of the information is correct so both of your arguments are pointless.

See the page for Storm. This is what wikipedia considers to be a good article. Note how every single phase of Storm's life is referenced with the comic book where it is attributed from. Now obviously this is hard since there are so many comics for each character so online sources are preferred. Please go to the relevant section regarding online sources for wikiproject comics.

None of the renditions of Juggernaut matters in wikipedia regardless of the fact that you can verify them. You should include a mention saying that it is ambiguous whether he fooled the government as he did say once (include the reference from the comic book or Fooled.jpg) that he did so while in X-Men Forever (include reference refuting from the comic book that refutes this), that he had started to redeem himself. This is likely to be due to... etc. Zuracech lordum

Good. The article can at least be worth discussing as parts of it are verified. I possess some of the comics mentioned within the references so I might check up on them but I trust that the references are accurate. Generally, material within the X-Men series are more reliable than material from a limited series (in my personal opinion, DO NOT ATTACK ME IF YOU DISAGREE) as usually a large part of the character's history stems from the X-Men comics.

At uncannyxmen.net, it says on X-Men Forever #6, Juggernaut tries to redeem himself by serving the government. Now, regardless of whether this is unusual for him or whether he was primarily an evil character, this is what happened. He may have fooled the government later but at that time, this is what happened. If he said later on that he had fooled the government, then an addition should be included later on within the biography to that effect. Just because you know in advance that he fooled the government (or you believe that he fooled the government) does not make it legit to remove any statements that disagree with that belief throughout the article. THAT IS POV.

Regarding the claim that DrBat seems to be softening the character, I can only say that Luger1 can rectify that issue by including information about his evil adventures and referencing each comic that it comes from. Hitler cannot be characterised as an evil megalomaniac by removing all information pertaining or portraying his benevolent nature.

Finally, I would like to request Luger1 to not engage in personal attacks and rude language ("bloody wrong", "waste of public space" etc) as they are not germane to the case. Don't be a dick, or if that's too offensive for you, don't be dense.

Good job with the article, nevertheless. I'm sure hundreds of people around the world appreciate the work. Zuracech lordum 16:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Final nail in the coffin, hopefully - Reformed villains —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zuracech lordum (talk • contribs) 10:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

http://marvel.com/universe/Main_Page is a user-created encyclopedia, similar to Wikipedia, and as such, isn't a reliable source. - jc37 10:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

So what is a reliable source for comics? cbr and comicbooksdatabase don't have much information for characters in comics. Zuracech lordum 15:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Character History

Ok, I did some minor editing to the character history, and added "some" fact tags. (I tried to limit them to the more problematic statements.) I also commented out a section of text that simply needs a lot of work. It's better to remove the entire section than to have such potential misinformation in the article. Please don't remove the comments until the sections are cleaned up. - jc37 11:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Much better. Do not think it will appease those two arguing up there but it's a step in the right direction. Zuracech lordum 11:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Included that section with "it is debated" because that seems to be major point of contention between DrBat and Luger1. Zuracech lordum 11:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

We should only use "it is debated", if the target is debated in one or more sources, not if Wikipedians are debating. But I understand what you were trying to do : ) - jc37 11:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It's better to remove the entire section than to have such potential misinformation in the article.

I sourced all the relevant issues for the info in that section. The text may need to be cleaned up, but all the info is correct. Please do not remove it. --DrBat 18:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The part that states "Juggernaut recently reaquired the Gem of Cyttorak and with it his full powers" should be removed. He has the gem, but he has not been shown using it, nor has he been show at full power. This is strictly speculation and cannot be verified.24.31.253.131 20:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] resemblance to the sandman

Does "Cain Marko" relate to "Flint Marko?"

No theres no connection. Please do not add to the talk page unless it has something to do with the page. Also please sign your posts. Thefro552 23:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Was War Hulk empowered by Apocalypse or Franklin Richards when he stopped Juggernaut?

Given that it's been put into question I've checked this up as extensively as possible to not be unfair about it, and it's actually pretty confusing with major contradictions.

Here’s everything shown or stated about War Hulk:

Apocalypse making Hulk an offer: ”You have shrapnel in your skull Hulk. Ghosts in your past. These make you vulnerable. I can relieve you of your vulnerability. No one and nothing could ever hurt you. Not even she could.”

In the operation room:

“My technology, taken from those who come from the heavens, the Celestials, tells me the energy the Hulk generates will be instrumental in the coming. That energy must be mine to control… For it may give me power over the Celestials themselves.”

-I.e. he wants to use the Hulk’s nexus-energy, derived from imminent Celestial Franklin Richards pocket universe, to increase his own power.

Apocalypse then proceeds to remove the shrapnel from Hulk’s brain, while the ghost of Hulk’s father continues to torment his son.

Apocalypse lowers the helmet on the Hulk’s head and he can no longer hear his father. His eyes glow red in motivation as he says: “Ahhh… Peace.”

During Hulk’s fight with Juggernaut the latter continues to push the Hulk backwards, until the latter receives yet another dose of Heroes Reborn nexus energy, glowing green in the process, and stops him in his tracks, then immediately throws him to Cairo.

Apocalypse: “As I thought. The power of the Celestials supercedes all but my own. The day of judgement is approaching, and the global upheaval from which a new era will emerge is upon us. Of all the X-Men’s non-mutant foes the Juggernaut seemed the most puissant. He seemed a valuable test of celestial might. I desired to learn whether his power could withstand my own… and by extension, that of the Celestials. Clearly I’m receiving my answer.”

-Yet another reference to the Hulk’s Celestial energy and the coming of Ashema.

After Hulk accidentally cripples Rick Jones and his father’s ghost turns up again, he rips off the helmet and armour melded with his skin. Meaning: No genetic modification. Beyond this no shown empowering mechanical features were shown within the armour.

Apocalypse appears as a hologram before some of the New World Order leaders and tells them that their pawns served a purpose as a testing arena for equipment that would enable him to monitor the upcoming Celestial cataclysm and use it to his advantage, then blows them up.

Green Mail issue #461:

“Apocalypse’s enhancements did increase the Hulk’s strength, so ish. #457 didn’t give a true indication of who is stronger, Hulk or Juggernaut. The question remains unanswered for now!”

“Hulk’s strength had been boosted before that fight, so it was not a fair representation.”

This seems like a big contradictive mess all around. Apocalypse is strictly interested in harnessing Hulk’s nexus power for his own purposes, and simply melds a helmet and armour with his skin, along with removing the shrapnel, and making the Hulk far more focused and clear-headed in the process. Hulk is shown receiving one of his recurrent Franklin Richards power-ups in order to stop Juggernaut, and references are made to Franklin’s Celestial nature.

Yet the editor inserts an “Apocalypse did it” mea culpa afterwards, even though the latter stated that he wanted to use Hulk’s power not the other way around, and this was explicitly shown to be the source for stopping Juggernaut? Weird. I guess the only explanation that makes semi-sense is that Apocalypse stabilised the Hulk to receive the HR energy more efficiently, or somesuch. Still, it’s not a question about whether or not Hulk was empowered, just “Franklin did it” or “Apocalypse was responsible”.

I decided to ask PAD directly to make sure, but haven't received a reply. ( http://peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005526.html )

I finally checked for that old Usenet post by Peter David that I vaguely remembered and found it (or at least a mention) here: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.peter-david/browse_thread/thread/fe8a5b335fb1dc3e/bb0eb0bea95c3544?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1#bb0eb0bea95c3544

">Who, in your HO, is the stronger: Hulk, or Juggernaut?

For sheer physical strength, it's the Hulk. However, nothing can stop the Juggernaut (although the Hulk did manage it once, but he was aided by Apocalypse at the time.)"

But that still doesn't give a definite answer, since there's no question that he was _aided_ by Apocalypse's equipment, just if the helmet and shoulder pads powered him up, when the HR energies were the ones shown to do so in the actual book.

Make of the above what you will. Dave 19:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Answers the question for me. Good answer by Peter too, protects both characters. 192.249.47.11 16:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hulk's strength increases with his anger. Juggernaut's strength stays the same, unless he is able to tap into the full potential of the powers of cyttorak. When they first fought they were fighting to a draw, but hulk's stanima began to fade and his blows were getting weaker while Juggernaut kept hitting him harder and harder. He tried to end him and break his neck but that fueled the Hulk's rage and gave him a power boost that allowed him to grab him and throw him away. Juggernaut hasn't reached his full potential physical strength-wise. It is said that his strength is limitless. Hulk's increase with his anger. I say the Juggernaut is stronger, or at least stronger than base hulk. Juggernaut has also KO'd Hulk with ease before. The Black Juggernaut 14:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)The Black Juggernaut 10:55 11 september 2007

The only time he has taken down the Hulk was by tricking him by wearing civilian clothes, so the latter would severely underestimate him and hold bac, and repeatedly ambushing him. That's it. No other occasion and it took him considerable time. As for their strength, the official Marvel RPG listed the Hulk of 2003, and the Juggernaut of the same era. Hulk started at level 20, but could reach up to level 30 when mad. Juggernaut was level 19, and stuck there. Dave 15:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

That still counts as a KO. Juggernaut's strength allows him to knock out some of the best who never get KO'd like Hulk and Thor. I know on MarvelUniverse.com they are both classed 100. They can both lift (press) over 100 tons. I don't know what Marvel RPG is but it sounds like a game and you really can't base facts off of RPG games and stuff like that. If its not a game then I still don't know. I think that Cain lost his powers at that time. I forgot when this intially happened, but I believe that he was weaker as of 2003. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Black Juggernaut (talk • contribs) 07:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The game was official. The point is that Juggernaut has only fought Hulk when the latter was near his base, or in one case, when he had a higher base, but couldn't get stronger with his rage. Juggernaut has not taken down foes Hulk couldn't. On the other hand he was completely outclassed (literally handled like a toy in his hand) by Onslaught when the latter only had Xavier and Magneto's combined power, while Hulk overpowered Onslaught when the latter had added the full potentials of Franklin Richards + X-Man to the mix (i.e. hundreds of times more powerful/comparable to a Celestial). He also outpowered a 10x more powerful than normal Thor with a single arm. Basically Juggernaut has an advantage when Hulk isn't enraged, or just a bit enraged, is an even match when the latter is moderately enraged, but would be insanely outclassed if the latter was insane, at least in the above two instances. 30 is Celestial level, and the game was official, the same as the handbook. That said, this happens very, very rarely. Besides the above mentioned occasions it has only happened once. Although if Hulk is somehow able to match Zom in WWHIV it might be increased to four.

Juggernaut has been listed in the "75-90 tons" and "75-100 tons" levels. Hulk has been admitted outright as able to exceed the "100 ton" level many times over. In year 2003 Juggernaut had received his "External" upgrade, while Hulk hadn't received the higher base he currently uses. Then again, the current Juggernaut is apparently even more powerful, as his strength+unstoppability (which greatly increases the force of his attacks/movements) combo was enough to match the current Hulk when the latter was just semi-motivated. Dave 16:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Powers and Abilities

I just want to ask, those in the know, why the last line states the Juggernaut has returned to his previous power levels after describing how much it had been crippled in the previous paragraph, without explaining a single thing.

There is a huge gap there, and it adds confusion. Jaybonaut 07:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I think maybe we can explain that he was loosing power without going into all the unneeded details of just what he could and couldn't do in his depowered state. Since he is back to normal as it were it just seems unnecessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.149.40 (talk) 09:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, the paragraph does not explain how he got back to his previous power levels at all. They go into detail as to how he lost his abilities yet end it with just stating 'HE'S BACK and STUFF.' A simple sentence or two explaining how he returned to his old power levels and if he has the full power of Cytorrak, the god of destruction, would be appreciated. Jaybonaut 21:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:AOA CAIN.jpg

Image:AOA CAIN.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 05:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Juggernaut 517 thumb.jpg

Image:Juggernaut 517 thumb.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.

BetacommandBot 04:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Juggernaut vs Wolverine.jpg

Image:Juggernaut vs Wolverine.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.

BetacommandBot 04:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Juggybackoriginal.png

Image:Juggybackoriginal.png 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.

BetacommandBot 04:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:XMEN161.jpg

Image:XMEN161.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.

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) 07:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jugg heal.jpg

Image:Jugg heal.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 ensure 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.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)