Talk:Betsy Braddock/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Where does Psylocke escape in the book?

Could someone tell me where Psylocke escapes in the book? What page number is it?

Can you specify the book? I am sure she has made lots of escapes.Dorin 20:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

i think they mean the X-Men: the last stand novellisation. Amo 22:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I do. So where did she escape in the novellisation of the movie? could I have the exact page number?

Removed image

I removed Image:Psylock.gif in a recent edit. Why? For starters, it was an obnoxiously spastic animated GIF; very small number of frames repeated, ad nauseam, that was really getting on my nerves. It also has no copyright information. On top of that, she doesn't look any different on the show than she does in the comics; the picture doesn't illustrate anything that isn't already taken care of by the other images. I also redid the EVula 15:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

on film

does anyone know of a pic where you can clearly see the tattoo? i had not seen this. Amo 21:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, i didn't see the red tattoo in the film. She and callisto's gang all hang regular tatoos of a mutant symbol, as a display of pride, but as i say, so far as i could see they were your standard ink tatoo. I removed this speculation from the article. Amo 12:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

If you look closely at the Meiling Melancon Psylocke pic, you can see a red scar-like mark over her left eye.NeoCoronis 20:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

A better example is at Meiling Melançon; same picture, but this one is blown up in the code. EVula 21:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
the pic in the Melançon article looks fuzzy to me, and i can't see anything above her eye, as her fringe is so long. Amo 22:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, speaking of the film, it seems no one here can decide whether or not Psylocke died at the end of the film. One minute, someone says she went of camera and lived, and another, it says she got fried. Because of this flip-flopping, can we lock the article until further noticed? If not, what can we do to reduce the flip-flopping? Can't we all decide on one thing?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crboyer (talk • contribs)
Well we can wait for the DVD and do a frame by frame analysis. Or we can wait for official word from FOX. I don't really care whether she lived or died anyway. --Facto 19:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, good idea. I think we can wait for the DVD. Crboyer

I tried to clarify this section last night...hope it helps. Tullyman 16:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Marvel Comics characters who can fly

Psylocke is listed in the "Marvel Comics characters who can fly" catergory, please can I ask why? I've never seen her use the ability of flight. Even her telekinesis doesn't allow her to fly (yet) - she can shatter mountains but doesn't have the control to move individual items. Would it be ok if I removed her from the catergory? Scarlettspiderg 20:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I forget the issue number, but during the introduction of Neal Shaara, she uses her TK to fly around with Archangel. That is the only instance that I can think of...but since it has happened, I would say keep her in the category. Tullyman 21:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

She is also shown flying after Rachel Summers (who was possessed by Nocturne at the time), don't know exact issue numbers but it was during House of M.

Psylocke flew in X-Men (2nd series) #103, X-Treme X-Men #2, Uncanny X-Men #464 and Uncanny X-Men #466. Not only did a she fly in Uncanny X-Men, but she levitated while stretching for the Sentinel ONE squad.

Film "Death"

Is this confirmed by a screen cap or statement. I saw the film twice, but I don't have the DVD, but I remember the screen not being on Psylocke when Quill and Arclight died. It also seems odd that they would close the book on a popular and prominent character from the comics with such a small role after giving her the power to teleport and seemingly shifting the camera off her during her supposed death. Onikage725 11:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Marvel vs. Capcom 2

Concerning her appearance in MvC2, I don't recall Psylocke ever being considered a top tier character. In fact, I have never in the history of my time on the internet read anyone talking about Psylocke in MvC2, leading me to believe she is in fact rather weak in the game.

Well, she is on the cover. That makes me think of her as a top tier...(the japanese version had EVERYONE on the cover, so this is lame reasoning)

There are aspects of her in Marvel vs Capcom 2 that make her a candidate for top tier

~ One of if not THE fastest player in the game ~ A triple jump ~ The Moonsault flip that easy allows her to take advantage of the triple jump in an air combo. ~ Her combo connection is seriously loose making it very easy to combo. ~ A fast and tall directional fireball. ~ High priority and good range with the majority of her punches and kicks. Her Hp in all its forms and her jumping and crouching HK as examples. ~ Almost instantaneous connection on her Alpha "Psy-Blade" assist. ~ All standard moves can also be used in the air as well as 2 of her 3 super moves.

However there are a few reasons she would be thrown out of top tier status:-

~ Takes damage moderately badly. ~ Teleport move leaves her very prone and is far too slow to be considered useful. ~ Does not have a strong anti air attack. ~ Her super attacks all require relatively close range, and leave her vulnerable if missed. ~ Her Super attacks lack damage. ~ Her supposedly powerful Psi-Maelstrom move from Marvel Super Heroes has been nerfed to such a degree it hits for less than her standard Hp.

Hence why she is not considered top-tier. Mid High possibly, Its open for debate but theres my opinion. PsyGuy 2nd 21:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Changes

Gloriana is not Psylocke's middle name in the true reality, only the one she had in the House Of M reality warp. As for her codename, it's a play on the term 'psi-lock', a phrase Chris Claremont coined and was fond of using in Uncanny X-Men at the time.

A psi-lock is when a telepath seizes someone's thoughts, freezing their body and holding them immobile.

It seems unlikely that Gloriana was her middle name even in House of M. It was given, effectively, as a title in House of M, which makes sense considering it was one of the popular honorifics of Elizabeth I.
The Gloriana moniker only showed up in House of M and was never previously mentioned, until the cannon 616 Psylocke is called it on panel its not concrete. Also those Marvel guidebooks that get published often get information wrong so they too aren't a reliable sourcePsyGuy 2nd 21:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Intro getting long?

Should some of the first few paragraphs of this entry be put down in the "character history" section? j-beda 14:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't the birthday part be considered trivia? PsyGuy 2nd 21:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Psyche?

I'm going to remove the phrase "believed to be a pun on 'Psyche'" from this article until someone can verify this assumption. I've always thought it was a combination of "Psychic" and "Warlock" (though admittedly that doesn't make much sense). Applejuicefool 20:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Heh. That took me a bit. I don't know if there's any support for it, but it's awesome.

As Claremont said:- CHRIS CLAREMONT ] "Psy, from "psychic" / "psionic." Locke, implying someone who could either lock or unlocke someone else's brain. Since the externalization of Betsy's power was her psychic knife, which tended to spazz those it struck, or "lock" down ther nervous systems, "lock" (or rather its feminine, "locke") made perfect sense." So no it has nothing to do with Warlocks, although she has been called a Mind Witch on numerous occasions PsyGuy 2nd 22:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Flirtation

Seeing as how Psylocke has a naturally flirtatious personality I find it irrelevant to mention her current flirtation with Morph, she flirted more with Night Crawler and there is no mention of that. Her relationship with Beast could also be misconstrued as more than just good friends. PsyGuy 2nd 21:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm removing Havok/Alex for the same reason. 130.241.18.31 15:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Removing birthday entry

For something like this we should be siting a source, or at least naming the specific comic that is being referenced. It's not enough to just say it happened in a comic. Feel free to revert and add source. Dorin 07:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ultimatekwannon.jpg

Image:Ultimatekwannon.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 Wikipedia articles 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 16:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Notes section

I moved a seemingly ancillary comment about Psylocke's Brazilian name to a Notes section which I made. I didn't want to delete it b/c it was a cool fact, but if someone doesn't see the use of the section for one bullet point, talk about it. Tullyman 21:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Should the spoiler-info be moved to the notes section?

I say no, since it has to do with the character's upcoming history instead of a random fact (although I think that some of the stuff like the "letter in the article page" breaks compositional flow) Tullyman 19:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, let's keep it as it is then. I was just wondering because I feal that the "letter" should be deleted from the Shadow King-entry coming january and moving the spoiler-info would than have been something temporary.


Seeing as notes = trivia, I did as the trivia box says:

"Content in this section should be integrated into the body of the article or removed",

I integrated two notes and removed the third one (under the notes section), then I removed the Trivia-tag. But now I see that a TWINKLE has put everything back into the note section and put back the trivia-tag. My question is why? I also removed a non-article (speculation) info under Television, which the TWINKLE also put back. I ask again, why? 194.17.6.3 14:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The current picture

I know Psylocke dresses skimpily, but surely there is a better pic available without the ludicrous thong.

Lots42 08:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Relationship

The section here makes no mention of Beast. Does anyone know more about this? I missed it in the comics myself, but when she returns to the mansion with Rachel she and Hank are way more than friendly. Kiss, lick, sniffing (and references to how she smells). I can't find the issue at the moment, but does anyone know more on this? I just remember thinking "what the bloody hell did I miss." Onikage725 11:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I read that bit in the LJ community scans_daily. Beast was being a silly flirt in his re-examining of Psylocke. She -had- to be re-examined to make sure she was Pyslocke and Beast, using his animal senses, takes the opprotunity to be a sly dog. Then Besty gives him a friendly kiss. That's all. Lots42 08:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It happened in Uncanny 460, possible Psylocke's best issue ever for interaction with other x-men. PsyGuy 2nd 21:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Psylockenewoutfit.jpg

Image:Psylockenewoutfit.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 04:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Psylocke - exiles.png

Image:Psylocke - exiles.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 02:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Ultimate Psylocke

I'd just note that there's a confusing statement in this portion that is not entirely correct. It tells us that "David" is Xavier's son, and that in the 616 universe he is known as Proteus. But in the 616 Universe, Proteus was Moira MacTaggart's son Kevin, and Xavier's son David was Legion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djcbuffum (talk • contribs) 03:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me, or did Betsy seem to be of Asian origin in Ultimate X-Men even before she posessed Kwannon? Ultimate James and Brian are clearly Caucasian, so I'm not sure what to make of this, but that's what it looked like Daibhid C 15:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

You got a point, Betsy looked a bit Asian there. But as long there is no concrete info, just leave it at that IMHO. Onomatopoeia 14:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Betsy Braddock was originally from Great Britian, it was only after she was kidnapped that her appearence was changed to that of her captors, which were of Japanese origin. They were ninja, who along with assimilating her appearence also taught her martial arts while incorporating her "psyche-knife," in her fighting capabilities. She isn't Japanese, she is British JennyFinn 20:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
JennyFiin: That is what happened in the normal Marvel U, are you saying that's what happened in the Ulitimate Universe too? Dorin 22:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
So, I'm not the biggest expert on X-Men ever, but "British" is a nationality, whereas "Japanese" is both a nationality and an ethnicity. 29 May 2006
"British" is a ethnicity when compaired to the other cultures in Europe, just as Japan is different when compaired to Korea or China. But this hardly matters since this discussion is over the Ultimate version of the character, and JennyFinn is clearly talking about the mainstream version.

Is Ultimate Psylocke a mutant? I've only seen her appearance in the storyline with Proteus, but it seems to me like she is not classified as a mutant. Her position is not surrounded by the controversy associated with mutanthood; maybe she's only a "normal human" whose psychic ability is unrelated to mutation?

Psylocke is a mutant in the Ultimate universe. It was stated by Proteus (while in possession of her body) that she used her family status and STRIKE affiliation to avoid the Sentinel attacks aimed at mutants worldwide.

Ways to shorten the main article

I was recently asked to create a new article for alternate versions of Psylocke (see my talk page) because they wanted to add more but didn't want to lengthen this already long article. This article does need to be shortened, but I don't know if creating that article is appropriate as that is not a very large section of the main article. Should that be created, or should something else be broken away into its own article? --Freak104 (talk) 22:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

How about shorten the Crimson Dawn section, removing the info that is already explained in the CD article? I was also thinking of moving the "In other medium" info to a separate article, concentrating the article on comic book Psylocke only. NevliX (talk) 11:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Just like the 'Other versions' the 'In other media' section is not long enough that the removal of it won't shorten the main article very much, and it will create only a stub (not a full article). -Freak104 (talk) 16:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Article locked: costume vs costume

The article's locked for edit warring and there isn't even a thread about it on the article's talkpage? What the hell? If all that edit war was about was those two images, it was extremely silly. Neither, to my eye, is particularly good, although I must express my marginal preference for the previous image, the purpler and more colorful one with the red sash. She's not exactly an iconic character, and so it's hard to say what constitutes a "classic" costume in her case, but to my eyes it's that one, not the one currently illustrating the article. I think it's less a case that the colorful image looks iconic, and more that the latter image, the current one, looks too generic.

Can we actually talk about this, so the stupid article stops being locked down? Ford MF (talk) 22:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

In general, I agree. (As far as kicking this off, that's a different can I'm not willing to open atm.)
The character sketch fits "Current powers" a lot better than it does the infobox, though having both is a step from "katan-n-leathers character only sketch" for both spots. - J Greb (talk) 23:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

What original research?

I followed the link from the "original research" tag, but couldn't find anything in the Editing Talk-section with referance to it. I don't doubt that the person who put up the tag saw something that was questionable on the article, but it is difficult to see what it is (specific). 194.17.6.3 16:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I've just looked through the article and I can't see any major problems. If there is anything that needs addressing it'd be worth flagging it inline. If no one can point anything out I'll remove the header. (Emperor (talk) 03:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC))
It was added here with no explanation. [1]. Hiding T 00:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Go ahead and remove it, there are more than 100 references in this article, and as you said, one can e.g. use a simple tag like citation needed. Talsurrak (talk) 22:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Name

First, Gloriana is not Psylocke's real name. It is a title for a member of the royal family (in the House of M world), in the same way Regina is sometimes added after the current Queen Elizabeth's name (Regina being Latin for Queen). Gloriana is Latin for glory or renown, and was a title applied to Queen Elizabeth I.

Second, though the comics are currently spelling Betsy's full first name with an S, the original spelling used was with a Z. If the comics began spelling Spider-Man's real name "Peter Perker" then that'd be a mistake, not a name change. It's the same thing here. The original spelling is with a Z, it's been Z through much of her history, and Marvel's Handbooks, from the 1980s to the present ones, have all spelled it with a Z. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.242.247 (talk) 15:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In New Exiles #9 (August 2008), Psylocke says in the Letters page that "her name is spelled with a 'z'. It is and always has been 'Elizabeth'." I guess someone should correct her name since currently it is being spelled as 'Elizabeth' with a 'z' as herself said. 201.83.214.105 (talk) 21:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Psylocke is not real. Hiding T 00:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
What are you saying Hiding, that Psylocke is not real? I don't belive you! ;) Anyway, about the s or z in the name, it always depends on the writer and/or editor that deals with the comic book character at any specific moment, so it is sufficient enought to use the text: "...sometimes and originally spelled..." , that way we don't need to change the spelling every time a writer/editor at Marvel do. Talsurrak (talk) 13:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree - the New Exiles letter page clarifies the matter quite clearly. The "s" spelling is an error, albeit a prolific one. If the entry here insists on mentioning the "Elisabeth" spelling, then it should not be given preeminence over what Marvel has explicitly stated is the correct "Elizabeth" spelling; in other words, the note should be "Elizabeth Braddock (sometimes incorrectly spelled Elisabeth)". 90.212.213.237 (talk) 11:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that this is an official Marvel policy, I thought that it was the assistant editor of New Exiles who responded to the questions. But then again, as you mentioned in your edit summary, the name question was asked and adressed in an official Marvel comic book. About the words "...sometimes incorrectly spelled...", I don't think that they explain in a proper manner the fact that for years the s spelling has been used by numerous writers and editors, maybe we can use something like "for many years spelled as..."? Talsurrak (talk) 13:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm absolutely certain this is official Marvel policy. I am one of the Marvel Handbook writers, and specifically the writer of the Psylocke entries over the last few years (and if you want to verify that, I can be contacted via the e-mail address given for the Marvel handbooks on marvel.com). There was a long discussion the Exiles editors over the correct spelling of Betsy's name, which confirmed the correct spelling is, and always has been, with a Z (just as they have stated in New Exiles #9 - "always has been"). The S spelling is simply a prolific error. 86.129.192.232 (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Wolverine and the X-Men

I added information about Psylocke's role in Wolverine and the X-Men. She appears in Episode 8. The series is now airing in Brazil and I watched this episode here today. My English is not that good, so feel free to correct grammar and spelling. =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.83.214.105 (talk) 21:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

January 6, 2009 PH edits

Aside from general copy edits, mostly for streamlining wordy phrases without changing their content, I made edits for WPC MOS for issue dates & vol. #s, and default-sized thumbnail images, as per image guidelines. Also, out-of-universe PH is written in past tense; in-universe FCB is present tense. Finally, when PH gives issues cite in prose, there's no need to repeat it in footnote; should only be footnoted if, as in some cases here, the prose reference doesn't specify an(y) issue(s).

I deleted a sentence or two of newsiness regarding upcoming plans; this information came from a solicitation reference, which WPC guidelines disallows, as well as a source that used that solicitation information. In any event, this sort of newsiness is discouraged in the encyclopedia and better suited to Wikinews.--18:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Time to archive this talk page?

This talk page is getting very bulky, should we start archiving older material? Talsurrak (talk) 10:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Main Photo

The main photo needs to change to the old one as Psylocke didn't, in fact, move to a new/her old body.--RossF18 (talk) 20:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Images

There are a total of 9 non-free images, which is not minimal use, and a fair-use vio. I would recommend keeping the Box image, the Captain Britain image and the X3. It's a shame as many of the images are fairly pointed, but the trimming of the article may also help in resolving some of the image proliferation. -Sharp962 (talk) 03:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC).

Wouldn't it be easier to create separate articles to "Psylocke in Other Media" and "Alternate versions of Psylocke"? This way, we would have less images in the main article, and the main article wouldn't be so long. Thoughts? 201.83.230.194 (talk) 21:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the number of images should be redused for the sake of reducing the number of images. They are used in an educational way, and not just simply as a gallery of images. Each image in the article illustrates a concept about Psylocke (and without duplication). Given the visual nature of comic books, I don't find this to be innaproriate. Also, compare the number of images to the Superman article, which has been featured several times and pointed out as a model. As for creating seperate sections for "Pyslocke in Other Media" and "Alternate Versions of Psylocke", I think this would be a good approach to reducing the bulk of the main article.Dorin (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed with Dorin.--RossF18 (talk) 21:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Fictional character biography

What happened to her fictional character biography? Every other X-Men have their biography divided in several items, but Psylocke's is just a very brief one and it lacks several facts about her history. I wish her complete fictional character biography could return. Can anyone work on that? Thanks. 201.83.225.145 (talk) 08:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I was just as upset as you at first, but I think that the biography section is now more suited for a encyclopedic article. The sections needs to be fleshed out a bit more though, making them more like the Storm biography/publication history sections. 91.95.6.80 (talk) 12:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean, but still. If all the other X-Men have their fictional character biography divided in several items, why Psylocke's must be the only one like this? As I said, it lacks several facts about her. There should be a pattern. Yet, the "Powers" section, that is not as important as a character's biography, is too long. 201.83.214.105 (talk) 06:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
You have a point there, but looking through the power section, one can see that it also contains parts of the comic book characters fictional biography. I also saw that this article had been rated as a B-classed article withouth any explenation. I will read through the quality scale and see what the requirements are for this type of class. But I alo understand your frustration, the editor(s?) who made such a major edit to the article as to remove several sections and such, should have discussed the changes here on the talk page first, giving other editors the chance to give their inputs and opinions. Talsurrak (talk) 14:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I was WP:BOLD and editing per guidance and policy. For what it is worth, the page had been tagged as being too long quite a while before I got here. For more info, see the manual of style. Why aren't all X-Men articles like this? I have one pair of hands. I apologise it doesn't have the detail some of you would prefer, but consensus appears to be that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia rather than a fan guide. It has been rated as B-Class because it is referenced, has no major grammatical errors, has infoboxes and images, is well structured and is fairly comprehensive. Hope that helps. Hiding T 22:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
As I said before (I had an account), I find that the biography section is now more suited for a encyclopedic article (very good edits btw), and yes, being bold is encouraged, but so is talking about a major edit on the talk page, to ensure that major edits are performed smoothly. About the classification, thank you for the information. I'm to much of a beginner myself to be able to classify an article, but I don't doubt that this article probably is B-class. It's just that I've seen some B-classed articles getting warnings about class-removal, since their ratings hadn't been explained, maybe you could put your good explanations up here? Talsurrak (talk) 12:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Articles are being reassessed based on whether they have the B-Class checklist filled in or not. I have filled the checklist in, so there's not really much need to fill the comments section in. It might actually be worth removing that from the banner at some point, to be honest. As to not making a note of my edits here, I can only apologise. Hiding T 19:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
All of this might be true, but it seems as though this article is being singled out. Virtually every other major X-Character has a "fictional character biography" that is easily the same length as Psylocke's, if not longer. I don't know what makes this one more important than the others.Tathunen (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
"it seems as though this article is being singled out". You might want to rethink that in line with Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Nothing makes this article more important than any other, and the only person asserting it is appears to be you. I was performing clean-up, this page was tagged as requiring clean-up, I cleaned it up per the manual of style. Hiding T 20:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I think even Storm has a Biography Section. NO OTHER character has the biography section completely missing. Below, I've pasted a copy of the missing Biography section, which is a bit long, but needs to be included in a shortened version in the article. I think if an article is too long, split it up into sections. Create an Alternate Versions page that is separate and the In the Media section that is separate. Don't sacrifice detail in the mainstream universe version for Alternate versions. I think if we go through the biography section below, there will be things that are very important but are not included. --RossF18 (talk) 13:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
This article has a fictional biography. It's the section called comic book character, and this mirrors the article at Superman. If you want to rename that to fictional biography, please feel free. But I am at a loss to understand why we would summarise the information below again in the article. The comic book character section already summarises the information presented below. Hiding T 14:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Also, what is important is going to be a subjective opinion, and point of view. We write from a neutral point of view, and I hope we all respect that. Hiding T 14:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
From a neutral point of view, absolutely everything must come in making the article too long because even in what you choose to leave out, you're making a subjective choice. Something that we leave out as opposed to something else is also a point of view. Completely neutral point of view is not what the article needs to be encyclopedic since editors choose what comes in and what comes out all the time. Writing from a neutral or well balanced point of view is to keep editoralizing to 0, meaning that when something comes in, there is no commentary as to whether that is good or bad for the character. It just happened. Period. As far as deciding what's important, major changes in place of living, team membership, relationship changes, body changes, are all important. The last time she ate a pie is not important. That's not really very controversial or biased. As far as Superman, I was making a point as far as quality and quantity of biography, not the title of the heading. Supeeman's biography, even if it's titled differently, is much more extensive even if you take into account his more extensive history. And there is a distinction between a character history and a publication history, even in the Superman page. --RossF18 (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The Superman character does mention where he was born at least, this article doesn't even do that. --RossF18 (talk) 16:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
If we want to discuss length, the Storm article is four paragraphs. Superman's biography isn't that much more extensive, actually, it is also four paragraphs. As to the characters notional place of birth, I couldn;t source ut so I left it out. If anyone can source it, feel free to add it to the article. Hiding T 21:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Exactly. I agree, but those articles have both a Publication History, which is really what the first section of this article is (not a biography), and a separate Character Biography section. This article has only the Publication History. If you want to make the case that the first section is actually the Biography, that's fine, but that just means that there is a need for a Publication History. There is a need for both, regardless of how many paragraphs. If four paragraphs seems a standard for a high rated article, that's good. But right now there are zero in this article. If your argument is that the first section is really a combination, I think it is better to split it up to make it more in line with both the Storm and Superman articles, both of which are higher rated than this one. --RossF18 (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Why does there have to be both? But if you want to add a biography, feel free. I'll gladly help. As long as we keep it short. Agreed? Hiding T 23:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Consistency and agreed. --RossF18 (talk) 01:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
And yet the old FCB was just dumped back in. (Emperor (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC))
I cut it back again, I guess that's the consensus? Hiding T 13:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
No, it's not a consensus. I'm sorry, but I've put a lot of effort in her Fictional Character Biography. Why do you have to delete it just like that? ALL of the X-Men have a FCB just like that one. Why Psylocke's must be different? It doesn't make any sense. We should include it back, and then diminish the "Powers and Abilities" sections, which is too large and convulated. I'm sorry, but I'm really disappointed. I hope you understand.
Just one more thing, there's a whole separated article on Wolverine Fictional History. What are the patterns here? Why Psylocke shouldn't have her Fictional History like the others? Please, add it back. 201.83.197.22 (talk) 13:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

201.83.209.90 (talk) 05:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The Fictional Character History needs a big rewrite to not be in-universe. Also, per Plot summaries we need to "always contain references to when various stories were published - for example, 'In Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's 1986 story The Killing Joke, the Joker shot Barbara Gordon and paralyzed her,' not simply 'Barbara Gordon was paralyzed by the Joker.'" Dorin (talk) 18:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

race

Ok, I don't wanna sound racist but should it be noted that because of her martial arts skills and the way many artists draw her that many people confuse her with being an Asian women. I know many people are going to be mad at me for saying that, but many people confuse her race and i think that should be noted on the page somewhere. Again, i'm not trying to sound racist and if it comes across as such I'm sorry please forgive me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.108.194 (talk) 23:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

oh and one piece of my evidence is that in the movie she was played in she was played by Meiling Melançon. I truly think that this should be put on the page. Again I'm sorry if I'm sounding rascist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.108.194 (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

She is drawn that way because her body is that of an Asian woman. She's not drawn Asian because of "her martial arts skills." The "many artists draw her" Asian because quite simply, her body is Asian. Yes, she's British, but a villain has swithed her consciousness into an Asian assassin's body - so there is really no other way for the artists to draw an Asian body than to draw an Asian woman. That is adequately explained in the article and is not confusing. The movie Psylocke bears no relationship to the comic book Psylocke. The power set is different and so is Psyclocke's affiliation. The only thing that is consistent in the movie is her body type. Please read the article. --RossF18 (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


Immunity to Telepathy

It would appear that Betsy no longer has immunity to psychic attacks as evidenced in the recent Weapon X issues where Dr. Rot builds "Psychic bombs" out of brains. She has stated that the bombs were shredding through her mental defenses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.2.74 (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

?

How do you pronounce her name?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.191.80.116 (talk) 23:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

"Sigh-lock".Tathunen (talk) 17:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth/Elisabeth

To avoid edit warring, we will discuss this issue here.

While "New Exiles" may assert that the character's name (in fiction) is spelled "Elizabeth", that only suggests that the statement is a retcon, not a typo. Claiming that the alternate spelling "Elisabeth" is a typo from that point on and any time it was printed before then is 1) an application of original research and 2) in violation of Wikipedia's policies against in-universe perspective. As far as I can tell (and that is a limited history at my fingertips), the character has been referred to as "Elisabeth" which only came after she was introduced as "Betsy" in Captain Britain (vol. 1) #8 in 1976. The earliest spelling of her full name that I have found so far is in "Mighty World of Marvel" # 8, which was printed in 1984. New Exiles #9 was printed in 2008. That does not make everything before it a "retroactive" typo (if that is even possible). Instead, it only suggests that it is a retcon.

My advice is that until the first printing of her name is sourced, there should be no OR about whether or not the alternate spelling is "wrongly" spelled. If the first printing of her name is "Elisabeth", then the statement in New Exiles is clearly a retcon and should be mentioned as such. if the first printing is "Elizabeth" then the differing spellings through the years should be stated as being inconsistencies (perhaps in the publication history), not errors. If that is the case, and you wish to make a note of it, add the reference again. But again, only do so after you have confirmed the first printing of her full name to be spelled "Elizabeth".

This also assumes that that the cited statement in New Exiles #9 is indeed a statement about the spelling of her name and not some generic statement that her name is "and always was 'Elizebth Braddock'" for some other purpose (identifying herself, for example) and the author just so happened to spell her name with a 'z'.Luminum (talk) 20:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

"The earliest spelling of her full name that I have found so far is in "Mighty World of Marvel" # 8" Incorrect. Daredevils #1, 1982, the second page of "A Rag, a Bone, a Hank of Hair" and you will see Merlyn calling her "Elizabeth" when he recounts Brian Braddock's history - this was the first ever time her full name was given. She's named after her mother, also Elizabeth with a z. Betsy's full first name is given in subsequent chapters, and always with a Z. Including in Mighty World of Marvel #8, which I just checked - it is spelled with a Z, not an S. It got altered, very inconsistently, when it was relettered for US reprints, which is where the error first originated - they messed up the spelling, and in some issues used an s, in others the correct z spelling. As for the statement in New Exiles, and what it meant, how about this from someone working for Marvel who was involved in that statement? http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/forums/showpost.php?p=1550162&postcount=144 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.157.162.209 (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

That's why I said "I have found so far" and suggested finding an earlier spelling. However, this relettering explanation, especially from a reliable source, is a perfect reference to use as justification. Please insert it rather than the New Exiles direct quote. Also, in the interest of clutter-free text, I would just spell her name correctly and add a citation after it and remove the "incorrectly spelled as Elisabeth" part. That is better explained in Publication History where it can be expanded on, since the background requires more explanation for the differing spellings. The source demonstrates the real-world context of the change and why the other spelling is incorrect. Thanks for finding that. :) Discussion solved.Luminum (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Taken care of it.Luminum (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that! Don't mind my quick copy edit. DeadpoolRP (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Powers

It mentions that Psylocke still had her Limited Precognitive powers whilst in her Kwannon body. I cant remember a single instance in comics when she utilised this ability after changing bodies.PsyGuy 2nd 21:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

X-Men vol.2 #5. While piloting the X-Jet, she has a precognitive flash warning of a hidden explosive that endangered the lives of Colossus and Cyclops. Tathunen, 1 May 2007

Whoa, I just checked, your absolutely correct. PsyGuy 2nd 10:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Was the vision that Psylocke experienced in Exiles #96 a result of her Precognitive powers or not? In the Current powers-section is says that: "It is not known if Psylocke still retains her precognitive power", while the Power changes-section says; "Precognition of unknown scale as evidenced by recent visions in Exiles". So which is it? 129.16.49.38 12:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

On a slightly different topic regarding her powers - the article lists a whole load of "original powers" the character apparently had, stating: "Psylocke originally possessed the power of telepathy, she could read and project thoughts over long distances; control minds; subdue and tap into other's powers; affect people's memories; project mental illusions; and generate psi-bolts that could stun, injure, or kill others." This may be true in the sense that she had these powers when she was first called Psylocke, but it's not true of Betsy Braddock, whose powers were far more limited in her early appearances (in the Alan Moore and Jamie Delano stories) for example. The sources cited are X-Men comics, but she didn't appear in the X-Men - or gain the name Psylocke - until around 12 years after her first appearance, so while these are clearly valid sources they are not good sources for her "original" powersHobson (talk) 22:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC).

Removed Omega Level

I removed the speculation about Psylocke being an Omega level mutant in the power section. I can understand the reason for wanting to classify her as one, as she did inherented Jean's telekinesis, but I don't think that a mere power-switch can classify Psylocke as an Omega as it is the ability or the potential of a character to be an Omega, not the power that that certain individual has at the moment. Another factor speaking against Psylocke being a potential Omega is the fact that this has not (to my knowledge, you may correct me if I'm wrong about this) been officially confirmed by anyone, neither by Marvels editors or their writers.

You can out it back now, just read this Psylocke Receives Mega Power Boost and this Big things coming for Psylocke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.221.69.138 (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Is anyone going to update it?

I could copy edit afterwards.

References would also make a use of some more dates in the comic book issues.

And of course the lead is way too short. --Niemti (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Psylocke. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Psylocke. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Psylocke. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Betsy_Braddock/Archive_1&oldid=1057280292"