Question[edit]

Why are you all of a sudden not showing the status and relatives of the superheroes/villians anymore? I keep trying to put them back but it doesn't work. Can someone tell me how to put them back please? And maybe show me hot to add new pictures to show the charater i.e. how did you change the Juggernaut Picture?

You can answer here-9:30 July 17, 2006

Check here for a relevant discussion of the variable in question. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~ --Newt ΨΦ 14:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Onslaught request[edit]

Someone really needs to fill in stuff on this page about Onslaught. --Lowellian 20:22, Nov 11, 2003 (UTC)

A short paragraph has exhausted everything I know about Onslaught. Why don't you do it? —Paul A 09:33, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Vital stats[edit]

I removed the following from the article because I really don't think RPG stats belong in Wikipedia. Since large numbers of these "vital stats" sections have been added to various articles, I'm using Talk:Strength level (comics) to discuss this issue in general. Bryan 08:04, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Ann Nichols would like to note that:

a. "blonde" is the feminine of "blond" and probably should not be used with a male character (unless that male character is temporarily female, of course)

b. Cain Marko called Charles "Chuck" in "Uncanny" #412 (see the Uncanny X-Men: Hope TPB, ISBN 0785110607, reprinting issues #410-415) & #422 (see the Uncanny X-Men: Holy War TPB, ISBN 0785111336, reprinting issues 421-427)

Unus called Charles "Chuck" in "Excalibur", volume 3, #4 (see the [u]Excalibur: Forging the Sword[/u] TPB, ISBN 0785115277 (issues 1-4) [Because Callisto's preferred name for Charles was "Chucky", not "Chuck", in "Excalibur", volume three, I'm not going to cite those issues.]


c. Charles was paralyzed from the waist down. "Limbs" refers to arms as well as legs. To state that his limbs [instead of "his lower limbs"] were paralyzed implies that he was a quadriplegic, not a paraplegic, which is not correct.

Note: As a long time reader of the X-Men comics I am surprised to find that Xavier is listed as a paraplegic, when his original crippling injury was a crushing injury to both legs battling the villain Lucifer. The details of which being that his legs were crushed by a large stone block. There was no injury at that time directly to his spine and subsequently stories involving his being found by Sage and aided by her until being airlifted to India from Tibet where he was injured mention leg wounds. Specifically I refer to those stories where he meets nurse Amelia Voght. As the wikipedia definition of paraplegia at least only refers to spinal injuries I must ask if this is an appropriate definition of Xavier's condition as he has, to my knowledge not received spinal injuries. I do note that during Morrison's New X-Men comics Xavier was rendered able to walk when Zorn/Magneto (Clone) healed his spine yet I believed this a mistake as, again, when was his spine actually injured?

-AlexSW —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.77.17 (talk) 13:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added the following ability: ** Adolescent hair loss. Upon reading the article, it clearly suggests that his hair loss is due to his abilities. After much debate with a friend, I felt it was only appropriate to include... TronUED (talk) 09:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image for rejuvenation[edit]

The article doesn't really need an image for the rejuvenation section, but the image of Xavier's clash with Magneto represents a more well known and prominent part of his history, and is therefore more deserving of an image. Putting it back. James26 22:10, 21 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Romances[edit]

I'd like to add a section focusing on his romances as well as attractions. As far as I know this would include Moira, Lilandra, and actually Jean Gray. Any objections to this? Tyciol 06:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brotherhood of Evil Mutants?[edit]

He's in the category for this group but I have no memory of when he was a member, anyone have a clue? Can I remove it? Tyciol 20:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


i belive he formered this group yes. when Cerebro was impersonating him. this was after the onsluaght chrisis. and things like that

Ultimate Deadpool?[edit]

Removed this line: "It was recently revealed that he is Ultimate Deadpool's secret identity." Predictably, Deadpool merely masquerades as the Professor to confuse the students. Alaren 21:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

X-Men 3[edit]

Editors keep spoiling this film in this entry. I'd almost prefer it be locked for a week or so, until everyone can actually get a chance to see it. These people aren't even putting up spoiler warnings. --Chris Griswold 08:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has happened at least three times in the past few hours. --Chris Griswold 11:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disagree I think that these entries should be kept up to date regardless. Nearly every X-Men related article besides the Professor X ones also include X-Men: The Last Stand spoilers and have stayed that way. There's also a possibility that several people are coming to this entry looking for said spoilers, and of course add them when they don't find it within the article. However, I do agree that there should be at least a spoiler warning.--Thores 21:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This isn't a spoiler site. It's an encyclopedia, and the movie only came out yesterday. It's not informative; it's rude. These people were being dicks --Chris Griswold 01:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spoiler warning!!!!![edit]

OK, I'm feeling pretty annoyed. I just skimmed down the trivia section and what did I see, second to last? A spoiler warning. What do I do? Read it. Why? Because it wasn't the last one. And spoiler warnings are usually last! Are they not? So now I know something I wanted to find out myself. I am requesting that we move the trivia spoiler warning to the bottom of the trivia section. In fact, why is it even in trivia?? It's part of his biography for the films! Rant over. Crazy Eddy 19:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So you read the spoiler warning, and despite not wanting to be spoiled, you read on? That's too bad. I think is kind of interesting, because I was spoiled by this information on the Thursday night before it opened - three times, in fact, each IP user adding a new detail to the mix, none using a spoiler warning. Angry, I removed it each time. I mentioned this and was told that Wikipedia is updated as soon as possible, and that it should be there, but with a spoiler warning. So...I'm also the one who put it back. With the spoiler warning. That told you not to read any further.
As for it being in a trivia section: This article does not have a trivia section. It is in the "other media" section, where it is grouped with the other film information.
Sorry this happened, but it is your own fault for spoiling yourself. --Chris Griswold 03:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent contributions[edit]

Hi, all. I've recently added some material, almost all of which was deleted, so I'd like to discuss them here, and my reasoning for them. I've decided to leave in some of the changes to my contributions made by other editors, since this is a group participatory project, and some of them do look better.

Xavier's middle name. I don't know if this was the first issue that established it, but during writer Scott Lobdell and artist Joe Madureia's run on the book, Xavier's middle name was explicitly said to be Francis, (no doubt after Saint Francis Xavier), in the issue where he is speaking to the captured Sabretooth. User:ChrisGriswold responded to me by telling me, The middle name can go in the SHB but not in the article. This is WikiProject Comics policy as I understand it. First what exactly is "SHB"? And which policy is this? All the biographical articles I've read have always given the subject's full name, including ones on fictional characters that give the real name after the alias. If someone could fill me in on the policy that indicates otherwise, please do so. Thanks.

The New X-Men in Giant-Sized X-Men #1. Some modicum of detail is necessary, particularly as it pertains to major events in the X-Men. Yes, this is not the article on the X-Men, but since such shakeups pertain to Xavier’s relationship and mentorship of the team, some detail is necessary, IMHO. Mentioning the new, more international members of the X-Men that Xavier assembled to rescue the X-Men from Krakatoa, is such a watershed moment in the X-Men (and comics in general), that it’s perfectly reasonable to mention it. Other editors trimmed it so much that not only was it made unreasonably vague (it mentions the X-Men were “captured”, but not by whom), but claims that the captured team was the “original” X-Men. In fact, it wasn’t. Beast had left, and Havok and Polaris had joined the team.

The Dark Phoenix Saga Again, this is such a seminal moment, not only in comics, but in terms of Xavier’s relationship to his pupils, that it is reasonable to mention it. Remember, Jean was his very first student, and met her years before he first assembled the original team. Mentioning his duel with her is crucial. Not only did other members delete this, but they also deleted his return to Earth, which shortly preceded it. This is an important part of Xavier’s history with the team. Without it, the entry goes from his original Shi’ar sabbatical to his capture by the Brood! It almost makes it sound like he was captured by them in space! Of the three contributions of mine that I restored, these two paragraphs are the only large ones that I re-inserted.

Verb tense I was strongly under the impression that past tense was used in such articles, but User:ChrisGriswold pointed out examples that are indeed written in the present tense, and pointed out policies and guidelines, both WP and non-WP, that indicates that literary present tense should be used. Perhaps I was misinformed on this point, or my perceptions were wrong, so I left that reversion alone. Thanks for the correction. :-)

If anyone disagrees with my underlying logic, please let's discuss it. Thanks. :-) Nightscream 04:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. Xavier's middle name. - I misspoke: It appears to be consensus that middle names are trouble, so if you want to use them, you need to reference somewhere where the middle name is explicitly stated. These are infrequently used, and when they are, they are often changed, and vandals can change them pretty easily without someone knowing the truth. See the Project talk page discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Names used within entries. Note that in my most recent edit, I left the first reference in. I had been seeing way to many middle names lately, and I may have overreacted with my removal.
  2. The New X-Men in Giant-Sized X-Men #1. - Some modicum of detail is necessary, sure, but not that much. We don't need to know the new team's roster, for instance. What bearing does that have on Xavier? Why does it matter to our understanding of Xavier that the X-Men were captured by Krakatoa and not Magneto? That's the only reason a detail should be added:It helps us understand the character. Furthermore, why is the Dark Phoenix Saga important to Xavier's entry? It might be a great story in comics, but that doesn't mean I should add it to every entry. Your mention of his duel with Jean is vague, and you do not make it clear why it is important. --Chris Griswold 07:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Middle name. Thanks for leaving it in. Personally, I don't see any "consensus" on that page you linked to. It looks to me like a conversation among four people less than three weeks ago, and as a frequent contributor to comics-related articles, certainly no one notified me that it was taking place, much less that it would have actual enforcement or citation authority. I mean, you can ask three people a question, and if they agree with you, then it's a "consensus" that applies to the entire WP comics project? That doesn't seem right to me. But if you really want a specific issue where they gave Xavier's middle name, it's Uncanny X-Men #328 (Jan. 1996); Page 2. You can see a scan of it here.

The roster. My point is that the team roster is incorrect. Right now, the article says that the "original" X-Men were captured. This is false. The team that was captured was Cyclops, Marvel Girl, Iceman, Havok, and Polaris. This is not the original X-Men. The Beast had left the team at that point, and Havok and Polaris were not part of the original X-Men. I made this point explicitly above. I won't re-insert the exact lineups, but I'm taking the word "original" out of there, since it's wrong.

Krakoa. As for mentioning Krakoa, well, you could use that question with any storyline. Why mention the storylines where the Brood captured them? Or the ones with Magneto. I can compromise and agree not to re-insert the complete roster, but mentioning that their captor was a sentient island kinda gives the reader some sense of the scale of the enemy that made it so necessary to form an entire new team. Every major storyline mentioned in the article mentions the principle characters and villains involved. Why not this one? I put Krakoa's name back in, but left out the respective line-ups of the two teams. I hope this is an adequate compromise.

Xavier vs. Phoenix. I notice you also deleted his battle with Dark Phoenix, arguing that this is Xavier's article, and not the X-Men's. Well, first of all, Xavier is one of the X-Men, in addition to their founder, leader and mentor, and few other battles underscore this one in which he was one of the two combatants, and which is part of one of the most memorable storylines in both X-Men and comics history. In addition, consider this: Xavier does not directly participate in most of the X-Men's battles with its foes, preferring usually to sit at the sidelines, as a mentor, right? So doesn't it stand to reason that the rare instances in which he does should be mentioned? Doesn't this one strike you as a particularly pivotal one in his history with the X-Men? I think it does. I put it back in, but I greatly trimmed it, as you can see. I hope this verison is more acceptable to you. :-) Nightscream 03:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No one needs to notify you of discussions at the WikiProject talk page. If you are a frequent editor of comics articles, you might want to join the WikiProject and have a greater say in how the project is shaped, and a good way to do that is to watch the talk page. Your recent edits are a great compromise.--Chris Griswold 06:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is a discussion in which all of the participants are in agreement not consensus? It was in the appropriate place, it was there for weeks, and if anyone had an objection, they could have voiced it. --Chris Griswold 06:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it falls under the definition of the word "consensus", but in the context of deciding WP policy, it seems odd to give that power to just four people. Nonetheless, thank you for the advice; I'll be sure to monitor that page more often. :-) Nightscream 19:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The power wasn't just in the hands of four people; it was on the talk page on which editors are invited to participate. Only four people chose to take part in the discussion. The rest either let those editors speak for them or chose not to take part. I know that if an editor says something I would have said had I been there first, I usually have not written a redundant response.--Chris Griswold 21:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More disambiguation required?[edit]

There's also "Professor X", the (extended) Doctor Who universe's analogue of the Doctor Who TV show, as mentioned in List of fictional television shows and Fanon (fiction). It doesn't have (and I don't think it deserves) an article of its own, but should it be mentioned somehow in the disambig section at the top?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.38.88.6 (talk) 12:56 June 27, 2006

I don't think it's necessary. If Dr. Who fans don't think it's important enough for its own entry, it's not important for a disambig. --Chris Griswold 20:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge[edit]

Per the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Proliferation of Ultimate character articlesWP:COMIC talk page, Ultimate character entries should be merged into the character's main article.--Chris Griswold 05:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Survey

Discussion closed. Outcome is merge. --Chris Griswold 07:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussions

Once again the Ultimate characters are their own person. Their becoming a bigger hit than any of the other Ult Universes. Let them be.Mr Wednesday 21:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Me too. Are you going to merge the movies into the main X-Men page then?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki-newbie (talk • contribs) 09:08 July 16, 2006

That's absurd. Based on the reason given for these merges, why would we do that? --Chris Griswold 17:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Exiles and alternative vertions[edit]

shouldnt we start to add alternate vertions of the charcter in a seperate section of the Wiki. for example i can think of numerous different vertions of Xavier. for example mutant x is mentioned but not given its own section. The vertion of Xavier featured in the First Exiles arc should also be add. as we well as What If Xavier became the Juggernuaght vertion of the charcter.--82.13.194.153 19:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

None of those characters are significant enough to warrant their own article. They all appeared in only one issue each (with the Exiles Xavier appearing at the end of #1, and then being the villain for #2). --DrBat 21:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good point. I also think we should get rid of the Japanse folktale stuff. --Chris Griswold 00:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Powers?[edit]

This article seems to vary a bit as to whether the Professor still has powers... Does he? Personally I think if he DOESNT have powers than he should not be leading a SUPERhero team.

He does not, and this is not a message board on which to air your opinions. --Chris Griswold (☏) 09:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regardless of his lack of abilities at this given time, he is stil (considered) the world's foremost expert on those dirty muties and was the founder of several dirty mutie organizations. So he's technically a qualified leader, just not in the field.

I recall, although not as prominent as Jean's, when he did have powers, the professor had telekinesis but to a much smaller extent, and he used it rarely. Can somebody confirm this?

You're thinking of the Ultimate version. Noclevername 06:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There was at least one story in the mid-'60s where he used his mental powers to create a (physical) shield. (Magneto also used his magnetic powers to induce mind control around the same time--standards of consistency could be kind of loose back then.) It's probably not worth mentioning in the article because it's not typical of how his powers were depicted, however. Strephon 16:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of appearances?[edit]

Should we have one or not? --HKMarks 18:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well since I'm the one that put it in there it should be! Seriously though, I reckon it should be since it's no different to having a discography or filmography. Granted he is fictional and like the more popular characters will have a huge list (imagine Superman's!! - which I won't be doing since I don't read DC.) I was going to give it a separate page but that would end up being deleted. I know some of the minor characters have Bibliographys but they only appeared in about 3-30 books... so unless we can compromise (and I don't intend to become a vandal either or a compulsive reserver), I will every now and then put it back in until a halfway point is reached. Fair trade I reckon. Originalsinner 19:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I began a discussion at the WP:CMC talk page. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think so, because if it's done for one character... then it should be for all (for people like Superman and Spider-Man, that would be way too long). RobJ1981 20:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Roughly a month"?[edit]

There is a throwaway section here about the similarities between Xavier and Niles Caulder of the Doom Patrol. The section states that "because of their close proximity to release (roughly a month), there is little merit to the argument that one is a copy of the other." There are a number of problems with this. First, what is this argument that has not been presented? Who is supposed to be the copy of the other? If you're going to refer to "the argument", you'd better present the argument. Most people claim Doom Patrol was the ripoff, yet it debuted April 1963; the X-Men debuted in September of that year. So:

  1. X-Men first appeared five months later, not "roughly a month" later.
  2. Doom Patrol was published first, so it was therefore not the ripoff.
  3. I know of no one who believes that X-Men was ripped off from Doom Patrol. The accusation is always presented the other way round.

The section is just unclear as to the author's intent by including this. Since his dates are wrong and the section is completely unsourced, I vote we get rid of it, unless someone wants to rewrite it as a more accurate and complete account of this popularly-held and long-debunked myth. --Canonblack 21:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're right. It's Man-Thing and Swamp Thing that were a month apart. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 21:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I second this. I believe comicbookresources.com has an archived article that discusses this topic in length. Is anyone volunteering to do this? --Douglass Moore (talk) 06:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Xavier's Combat Skills[edit]

In an Uncanny X-Men issue (#xxx; unknown) featuring Cable, after Xavier and Magneto discuss their views on the affirmation of peaceful coexistence between humans and mutants, they get in a fight with prejudiced thugs who were harassing an amputee war veteran in a bar in Israel. Magneto uses brawling techniques, while he comments that his friend's combat skills are more refined than his own due to Xavier's travels in the east. Xavier applies his knowledge of pressure points to a large, corpulent man, taking him down with a squeeze to his hand and explaining the maneuver. Before this he had used his precognitive abilities during the fight to sense one of the thugs attacking from behind with a chair, which he then broke with a swift strike of his forearm, and back-kicked the man. (Note that the events described here occurred before Charles Xavier and Magnus had parted ways, i.e. before Xavier became crippled in an accident.) --68.224.247.53 23:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wording (Xavier's Mission)[edit]

"Xavier’s mission is to promote the peaceful affirmation of mutant rights, to mediate the co-existence of mutants and humans and to protect society from dangerous mutants, including his former friend, the militant Magneto."

I think this is a very well-stated, accurate sentence, but I think it'd be best to change "dangerous" to "antagonistic" (or "abusive") and "former" to "old" (or "sometimes-"). The reason for the first being that mutants like the X-Men themselves are dangerous; it's more about how dangerous mutants choose to use their powers. The reason for the second being that Xavier and Magneto are very much on-again/off-again when it comes to friendship (they were antagonists in "Eve of Destruction" but friends again in the recent Excalibur series). --James26 14:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dangerous? I'd rather run to the X-Men for help then Magneto any day of the week. By that logic, the Secret Service is dangerous to the President. Lots42 10:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Professor X.jpg[edit]

Image:Professor X.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 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 04:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ultimateprofx.JPG[edit]

Image:Ultimateprofx.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 11:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Too long[edit]

The character history section is far too long. It needs shrinking down to five or six paragraphs, at the moment it is far too in-universe and doesn't comply to Wikipedia:Writing about fiction.~ZytheTalk to me! 23:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just a passerby throwing out a comment. Baloney. What, is there a space limit to the Interweb all of a sudden? This character has a very convoluted history, and applause to anyone who can summarize it in any way and convey all the writers have done over the years. I've seen a lot of these snotty "this section is too long"/ "this show doesn't deserve individual episode writeups" malarky, and hey, guys, Wiki can be as big as we want it to be, and we don't need to limit the efforts someone else has put into making a legitimate, factual writeup just because someone doesn't deem it worthy in their oh-so-sparkling opinion. - Omar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.183.16.137 (talk) 03:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mys-Tech Wars: Just some early morning thoughts[edit]

Re: the Mys-Tech Wars limited series. Technically it's canon Xaiver has seen most of his X-Men die in battle. Weird. Should be mentioned somehow but I saw the 'Too long article' notice.Lots42 10:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Darkxavier18.jpg[edit]

Image:Darkxavier18.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 04:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggestd solution[edit]

Why not expand the Alternative versions section, then split into a new article,like other Marvel chracters? It may solve the too long problem.84.68.210.166 20:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Xavier's Mutant Choices / Original Research[edit]

I enjoyed the section on Xavier's Dark Side, but the section about Xavier's choices as to which mutants to work with and which to abandon seems to be undocumented, and original research. Any thoughts? Snowfire51 05:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've never heard of it either. I'll probably delete it, but the user who put it into the article is welcome to revert it as long as he/she can cite some issue numbers. Notthegoatseguy 00:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The three citations at the end of the paragraph include the reference(s) for this statement, as well. See Uncanny X-Men.net Spotlight on Professor X. --68.224.247.53 12:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can't find those paragraphs in the current article, but accusing Xavier of only choosing "normal" looking mutants is just wrong. Beast was unusual looking even as a human and eventually became a furball, and Nightcrawler has always been covered up. It's arguable that the X-teams and X-books are the most diverse teams in comic history, having many ethnicities, economic and social backgrounds, and even disabilities. If he was trying really hard to only chose the normal looking mutants, he did a crappy job. Notthegoatseguy 04:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Top Ten most intelligent fictional characters[edit]

According to BusinessWeek, Professor X is listed as one of the top ten most intelligent fictional characters in American comics. Smartest Superheroes Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 10:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mummudrai[edit]

In issue # 5 of X-men Emperor Vulcan at the end Vulcan makes this statement. 

      "We will destroy all those who will stand in our way, including the one you call mummudrai...the one called Xavier."

Is Vulcan speculating that Xavier is a mummudrai? If so it might be worth mentioning.PhoenixPrince (talk) 02:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Xavier's body disappears[edit]

I don't get it. Why did it disappear? Why nobody finds it strange that a dead body disappears just like that? And that last one includes both the fictional characters and real-life readers! Am I missing something? --89.161.1.116 (talk) 11:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And what abaout the multiple times he got his walking habilites again? And lost it again? And gained again? Isn´t that a mutant power? "To get his legs working all the time somebody paralizes him?" Does he have a healing factor or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.45.184.169 (talk)

Mister X (Marvel Comics)[edit]

I don't understand why there is a link to Mister X (Marvel Comics) in the See also section of the article. Mister X is seems totally unrelated to Professor X, except for the fact that his last name is X. Incorporating it as a "See also" link makes it seem as though it has something more substantive to do with Professor X. Is there some relationship that I'm not getting? If not, I'm going to remove this link... WDavis1911 (talk) 23:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Someone trim the World War Hulk section[edit]

Honestly it was an unimportant 3-4 issue miniseries yet its summary is longer than Messiah Complex. This is an article about Xavier, not WWH. The detailed description of the attack and all the stuff about Juggernaut could go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.34.219 (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required[edit]

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) 17:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

story[edit]

shouldn't his fictional biography have it's own article because i think the bio takes up most of this page. supes has one, batman and spidey have one, so why not not prof. x? just asking.--74.237.120.11 (talk) 02:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relationships: Jean?[edit]

I added a citation thingy. Who is debating this? Where? On what basis? Knowing someone from the age of eleven, in and of itself, doesn't preclude eventual feelings of lust or romantic interest. What's more, it's a dark secret for a reason: there's no explicit evidence that he didn't, in fact, have an interest in her when she was eleven, disturbing as that may seem. At least a citation of a specific notable debate is in order, or this roundabout "defence" of Xavier needs to be removed.74.46.25.126 (talk) 19:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inspiration[edit]

I have not read the comics, but I have seen the films. I cannot see any reason for the statement that the professor was inspired by Martin Luther King, Jr. There is no comparison.

The statement's source (http://www.screened.com/news/professor-x-and-magneto-allegories-for-martin-luther-king-jr-and-malcolm-x/2316/) makes a case for the comparison. Whether you, as an editor, agree with it or not is irrelevant, since we try to maintain a neutral point of view by only including the opinions of reputable sources. The question is, is this article a reputable source? Primogen (talk) 23:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent "slice" in biography section[edit]

As I personally translated this article to hewiki, I couldn't help but notice the recent cut made in the biography section. The basic complaint was that the section is too big, so imagine my surprise when it was completely trimmed down to the basics at the justification that "this is not a vandalism", coming from a fan of the comics. Mind you, if something this big was sliced from what I have written, I wouldn't let it slide. Sure, the biography section needed some trimming (and believe me, I've trimmed it myself during my translation, to keep things relevant), but not this kind. As a third observer, and an avid translator of comic book characters in hewiki, I strongly object. Makes we wonder, what next? Do we need to slice every character's bio from now on? Arimis (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Avengers vs. X-Men correction[edit]

I changed

"Rachel engages him [Professor X] in psychic battle knocking everyone out except Spider-Woman and Professor X himself."

to

Rachel engages him in psychic battle, during which everyone is knocked out except Spider-Woman and Professor X himself."

The original implies that Rachel does the knocking out, which is not the case (cf. screen-shot).AVX knockout

This is from the source provided in the text of the section, but I see no ambiguity with respect to who does the knocking out. The only point that is not clear is whether Rachel is put under, too. Extenebris (talk) 11:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cleaning Up the "Fictional character biography" Section[edit]

The "Fictional character biography" Section is extremely lengthy and overly detailed. This section alone is longer than the rest of the page combined. It would be helpful if someone can take the time and edit it to make it concise. I want to thank, ahead of time, whoever can complete this task. JosephSpiral (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggestion: Remove everything that isn't sourced to a secondary source. If the only source for a plot development is the comics themselves, then it probably attracted little attention and isn't really important. --Aquillion (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The "Fictional character biography" section is a mess. It's entirely too long and detailed. DrRNC (talk) 18:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Professer X[edit]

Tell me About Professor x precisely everything — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:F:203:1F4D:DD19:7FEA:91DF:E81C (talk) 22:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Professor X. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Name pronunciation[edit]

Could someone please put the IPA for the correct pronunciation of his last name. Pqnlrn (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories