Talk:Scarlet Witch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics
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.

Contents

[edit] Bring back the Scarlet Witch !!!

It's just outrageous what some "big brains" at Marvel have done to this character! Wanda has always been a loveable, balanced character throughout her history . And her frankness and altruism shall always be remembered! What have you done to her? Bring her back!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.79.47 (talk) 11:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] House of M anachronism

Anyone understand why there is such a large gap between the loss of her children and the House of M events? Hellmark 04:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

During Avengers Disassembled, the Wasp accidentally mentioned the children, and that was the last straw. That's what unleashed the feelings festering inside her. Then, Dr. Strange, Magneto, and Xavier tried to hold her together on Genosha until Quicksilver ruined their work by warning her about the Avengers and X-Men coming to put her down. That's when House of M took place. Additionally, she re-created her children, in the form of two of the Young Avengers. It's not clear when their re-creation took place, but since she was only reminded of their lack of existence during Disassembled, it must have taken place after that. This, despite their remembering having lived entire lives before the Young Avengers came.--Chris Griswold 22:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
"Last straw"? That was the first time they'd been mentioned in years. Dr Archeville 15:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it was. She is said to have been unbalanced, and certain oddities of continuity were attributed to her. The reminder of her children made her snap. --Chris Griswold 20:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, outside of the comics themselves, the reason is the author of House of M remembered an obscure plot point from her past incorrectly, ignored the resolutions it had already received, and used it as a catalyst to wrap up that volume of the Avengers with a big bang. There were many factual errors in the story (Agatha Harkness's existence itself) that confuse the issue. In story, Wanda seems to have suppressed the memory of having had children, and is upset out of all proportion when she remembers.--140.247.127.104 20:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The matter of Harkness' existence isn't an error, it's a retcon that she hasn't been real since her return from the dead in Byrne's AWC. Note that when asked back then how she'd returned, she dodges the question.

As for Wanda's memory of her children, by the time of Disassembled, the idea is that her powers had been distorting her ability to tell the difference between dreams and reality for some time, and had by this point forgotten ever having had children.

[edit] Picture?

What is the herobox picture from? --Chris Griswold 22:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

In light of this subject I recommend her new main image, be from the New Avengers #26. Intensly dark and beautiful. Here is the link http://marvel.com/catalog/?category=AVENGERS& --The_Magistrate 15:29, 23 Aug 2006 (UTC)

I vote against this one. It de-emphasizes her power (her arms and hands are barely visible, her lidded eyes make her seem barely conscious), and we have no idea what events will take place in this issue written by her most controversial writer. The current image is more reflective of her history as a hero, not just a passive victim.--Erikacornia 18:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chaos Magic

From the Avengers Disassembled article: "Dr. Strange's comment that there is no such thing as "Chaos Magic" is a surprise, as Strange himself used it as his primary source of power for a time, and has seen Chaos Magic used on several other occasions. This comment also seems to fly against various important storylines involving the Witch from much of Kurt Busiek's and Geoff Johns's runs as writers on Avengers (vol. 3), including when she uses her magics against the In-Betweener in the "New World Order" storyline and to stop a bio-plague in the "Red Zone" storyline." Additionally, I recall Baron Mordo (one of Strange's arch-foes) as being touted as a "Master of Chaos Magic" (just as Strange was a Master of the Magic of Order). Were the writers unaware of this, or has Marvel been doing some massive re-structuring to their universe's magical background? Dr Archeville 17:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's an error.--Chris Griswold 20:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Basically Bendis dosen't care about continuity.

Despite what is said in the main article, there was only one mention of "Chaos Magic" in the Marvel Universe before it was retconned into being the Witch's power in 1998. It was in a fill-in issue of Dr Strange. That's all that's been retconned. Strange was using "Catastrophe Magic" as his power source for a time, and many people seem to be confusing the two. Bendis retconned away one fill-in issue of Dr Strange, and undid the retcon to Wanda's power, with this, plus the apparent return of the twins giving the implication that nothing Agatha has told her since her 'return from death' should be trusted. As it currently stands, references to Wanda's power being "chaos magic" should be edited out.

[edit] supervillainess?

I can't stand having her referred to that way, as she's been a villainess for about 3 years and a heroine for the other 40 since her debut. But I suppose it's technically true. Just grating--Erikacornia 05:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

well i think it also comes from her invlovement in Avengers Disassembeled and HOuse of M recently.

I removed the super-villainess bit, instead put that she started out as a villain but then reformed int a full-fledged super-hero.

Thanks, that's just much more fair. --Erikacornia 20:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

She is not evil, she had a nervious break down.

[edit] Stan \ Kirby era image

How 'bout some friggin' original Kirby era images instead of the washed out X-crapolla stuff that has nothing to do with the original masters that created the Scarlet Witch, Brotherhood of Mutats et al85.138.0.158 10:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't found a Kirby image yet, but I'll scan some Heck and Buscema images from the original sources soon. In the meantime, I've added a Perez/Marcos image that's pretty good.--Erikacornia 20:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I found an image from X-men #7; also a good Perez scan and a Michael Golden. Hope that satisfies.--Erikacornia 03:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] summary wording

Is "magician" really right for what she is? No rabbits out of a hat for her. I thought of sorceress, but she's not quite Clea or Topaz, either. Her main training is from Agatha Harkness; so I guess that would make her a witch or Wiccan adept. I'm not complaining, I just can't think of the perfect wording myself, either. --Erikacornia 20:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ult. Scarlet Witch pic

Can someone either update it with a Ultimates pic (where she's appeared more often, in a better costume, and actually IS by Bryan Hitch) or fix the credit for the picture currently appearing? She only uses the 616 costume in Ultimate X-Men, and I know Bryan Hitch never drew for that book.

[edit] wasp hates wanda?

Earlier versions of this page seemed to indicate an ongoing antipathy between Janet and Wanda. While Janet may have done Wanda no big favors recently, I don't think actual antagonism has ever been even as much as subtext between the two heroines, so I made some edits to address that implication. Denigrating one heroine to defend another seems counter to the family feeling the Avengers often acheived.--Erikacornia 23:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It may be an exaggeration of the truth, but between Janet's setting off Wanda's Disassembled breakdown, and her homewrecking encouragement for Wonder Man to pursue a relationship with her, a case can certainly be made for it.

Not to the point that Janet was malicious, however, at most careless or insensitive.--Erikacornia 18:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] House of M in relation to other realities

Can somebody answer this question for me please: Is Earth 616 the only reality wherein Wanda Maximhoff went insane and altered reality the way she has? What made this one so special?

[edit] Sexual assault in the Brotherhood?

The current version of this article claims Wanda was sexually abused during her time with the Brotherhood. While it has been shown through retcon that Toad and Mastermind did try, there's nothing to suggest they actually succeeded in this. Similarly, when did the "Wanda was also introduced to prejudice when a Transian boy her age attempted to sexually molest her. She used her powers to return to safety but was accused of attempting to seduce the boy." event occur?

I am just now reading Avengers issue 401 dated August'96. İn page seven while Wanda remembers her life with her father and the brotherhood, you can clearly see that mastermind and toad sexually assaulting Wanda, even while Pietro and Magneto are in the same room! there is also a minor dialog on the same page between Pietro and Wanda which I suspect referring to an incestous relationship between them.85.97.11.83 00:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Twins

The account of the conception of the twins is incorrect, the Vision was not transformed into a human, and the moment of conception was sexless, occurring on-panel during #3 of the second Vision/Scarlet Witch miniseries, a result of the vast amount of magical energy she briefly wielded at that point.

[edit] Editing the in-universe chronology of events

I've made attempt to give a more encyclopedic view to the first two paragraphs, but I'm at a loss as to how to extend that perspective to the very detailed and lengthy article that follows. In one way it's wonderful to have all that history remembered and preserved. In another it's extreme overkill and far too detailed to be useful to most readers, and is against the preferred wiki-style. All I can think of is to edit "boldly" and loose paragraph after paragraph, but I'm not sure that's the right approach.--Erikacornia 00:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I corrected the sequence of the events surrounding the birth of Wanda and Pietro's kids and the discovery that Magneto was Wanda and Pietro's father. It took place in The Vision and Scarlet Witch miniseries Vol. 1 #4 shortly after the birth of Luna, a while before Wanda became pregnant with William and Thomas. --KiplingKat 00:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.29.203 (talk)

[edit] Brotherhood of Evil Mutants Picture?

Rather than repeatedly change Dr. Bat's edits, I put the question out there for the readers. Should we use his Aaron Lopresti image created some years later for a different comic that refers to the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants era of Wanda's career, or is my image of actual Kirby art from the era under question preferable? He did after all design her character, and reflecting her changing appearance would seem to move the article further away from its in-story slant. --Erikacornia 17:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

If you want to use a Kirby image, could you try finding an image more relevant to her character history than Mastermind flirting with her, like one with Quicksilver and/or Magneto? --DrBat 17:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
What's wrong with Mastermind flirting with her? Your picture doesn't really show the actions in question either. It's a summary character page, where Lopresti is basing his work off of Kirby's. Lopresti is hardly as significant Scarlet Witch artist, on the scale of Kirby, Buscema, Heck, Perez or Milgrom.
I could change the wording about the flirting in my caption, as what he's actually doing is trying to get her to join with him in a leadership coup. I thought I was being funny. I chose that image because it depicts Wanda so well in Kirby's early style. Magneto and Quicksilver have their own pages, and shouldn't overshadow her on hers.--Erikacornia 18:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
For starters, I had previously uploaded a Kirby image of Wanda by herself, but it got removed.
Anyway, I suggested having Quicksilver and/or Magneto be in the image with her as opposed to Mastermind because her relationships with Magneto and Quicksilver are more important to her character than her relationship with Mastermind.
Furthermore, the Lopresti image shows Magneto rescuing Wanda, and Wanda with the rest of the Brotherhood. Therefore, I think it's a better image for the Brotherhood section than just her and Mastermind. I mean, she had a bigger relationship with Toad than she did with him. --DrBat 18:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Herobox picture

Any particular reason for using the Alex Maleev recent cover of New Avengers, rather than the perfectly servicable Djurdjevic cover that was up previously? Neither may show the classic or iconic Wanda, but at least in the Djurdjevic she has arms and hands, ie the limbs she needs to use her powers (or did for many decades). The Maleev image is emblematic of her current state of non-use and the "controversial" Bendis era of character destruction; I found an image focusing on her magical abilities to be much more appropriate than one that sexualizes her as a Klimt drawing. I'll wait for discussion, but I'm tempted simply to revert it back. For the longest time this page suffered through a fan art image; ideally it should be Kirby, Buscema or Perez who define the major visual concept of this character. --140.247.127.95 16:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC) --Erikacornia 16:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC) (sorry, forgot I wasn't logged in above)

I have replaced it with one of George Perez. She isn't using any magic, but isn't either in a "sexy" style or doing anything that seems like "fan art". Simply standing there. I think it fits the fair use rationale better. Perón 00:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, thank you, good choice! --Erikacornia 17:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brotherhood of Mutants Kirby Picture

DrBat, can we please stop haggling over the Kirby illustration of Wanda and Mastermind? I scanned it, I want it in, I've stopped replacing your Lopresti illustration with it, we've opened it up for discussion and no one else cares but us, I have a good rationale for providing at least ONE example of Kirby art on the page, and it happens to feature Wanda in a very nice full-on portrait bust composition. I'm just going to keep putting it back, and the article is hardly overloaded with images at the moment. So leave it in, okay?--Erikacornia 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect bit about Quicksilver in the JLA/Avengers section

I removed this sentence: "Quicksilver meanwhile found himself without powers, initially unable to access the DC Universe Speed Force." Firstly, it's borderline irrelevant to the JLA/Avengers section, because this is an article on Wanda. It can be argued that her close connection with her brother makes it relevant, but fine, whatever. The major thing wrong with this sentence is that it is untrue. As per JLA/Avengers issues #1 & 2, Pietro is shown using his powers while on the DC version of Earth. He's not as fast as the Flash (Yes, he can't access the Speed Force), but he never was. He is still superhumanly fast on DC Earth. Further, his powers are not contingent upon the existence of the Speed Force. Those powers come from his mutation; the Speed Force is (thus far) non-existent in the Marvel Universe. Zebraic 06:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

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

Image:Wandapietrro.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.

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 20:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SW Reworking

Shifted an image; added more sourced paragraphs and culled some side comments that are better suited to other characters' pages (eg. Mantis). Taking some time but the infortmation is accurate and in chronological order. Don't under why a user saw fit to recently delete sourced information in the first place.

Asgardian (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:A-104.jpg

Image:A-104.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) 19:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)