This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Comics: Marvel Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group. Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

It seems pretty silly to name this page Pietro Maximoff, which is not how anyone thinks of this character. It should get moved to Quicksilver (comics) or something like that. mhr

• I moved the page from Pietro Maximoff to Quicksilver (comics). -mhr 02:26, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I removed info from the page, which seems way too detailed for an encyopedic entry on a fictional character, and also seems suspiciously like something lifted directly from a volume of Marvel Universe or something (and therefore a copyright violation). -mhr 02:30, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The page says hi guys

nothing about his personal history (not including the evo version). Does anyone who knows a lot about him want to add anything? DrBat 18:51, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

I'm editing the portions of the page that state that his speed is 175 mph, as he has broken the sound barrier several times. If you dispute this check the Marvel.com official website, and this happens in several Avengers issues. Thanos2099

I took the end of Son of M to indicate that Quicksilver sees his place in the future, having those Terrigen powers, not that he has them now. This is opposite what is said in the article currently. --Chris Griswold 17:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I interpreted the end to be this: Quicksilver bathes himself in the mists for weeks. As a result, the crystals even become a part of his own physiology. Because of this prolonged exposure, he is able to jump incredibly far in the future, and he sees some sort of terrible destruction that further unhinges his mind. Moreover, as a by-product he now has the ability to restore the power of mutants, as in the case of the man on the street (who was actually the mutant known as Reaver) at the end of the story.

That's my reading of it, anyway. Anyone else have any ideas? - Bhissong 20:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that he can now induce Terrengenisis (or however it's spelt) in other people, whether there mutants or not, just like the crystals. As to if he fully restores people's powers or the same thing happens as in the SoM miniseries, that has yet to be seen. I personally think that he jumped to the end of Civil War (comics), and that what he saw (which may have included himself) damaged his mind further. Heck, he may have even seen his death. Which brings up the issue of if he really is time traveling, or just some facsimily, as in the Marvel Universe time travel creates alterate dimentions. JQF 00:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am interested to see whether Quicksilver with the powers is from now or from the future. --Chris Griswold 07:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bhissong is correct. And he can't jump backwards CG, only forwards and only temporarily. - SoM 03:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right...I didn't say he could. What I am saying is that Quicksilver talks about seeing his place in the future, and then it shows him in that future time. I took that to mean we were seeing what he was: a future version of himself. --Chris Griswold 03:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

88.218.25.207 01:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC) quicksilver does not come back at the excact same place that he left, he comes back at the place we was while in the future (as explaned in son of m 2). I corrected the powers page.[reply]

The explanation he gives in Silent War is clear : there's an unseen scene in Son of M that we learn about in Silent War. After his weeks of exposure to the terrigen mists, he took the remains of the crystals and put them in the flesh of his chest, thus getting the ability to to induce Terrengenesis through touch. That means the "powers and abilities" section is wrong : the crystals don't "grow out of his body", the bits we see are the ones he put there himself. I'm editing it.

Another thing : he states clearly that the future he can jump towards is the one that WILL happen, one that cannot be changed whatever one does. He tried to alter it, but always failed. 89.80.129.107 (talk) 11:34, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How does using present tense consistently more clearly differentiate between the past and the present-tense sections of a biographical document? I consider this to be counter-intuitive. If one finds oneself referring to the past here and then the present and then the past, even moreso. I look at the statement at the top of the main (bio) page and think that things have been dropped unside ip. Schissel | Sound the Note! 01:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This isn't the place to take up that issue. It's Wikipedia policy. You need to look up the discussion and article concerning the policy. Doczilla 21:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've tidied up some of the newly added PH, most notably by leading with dates and using present tense. Culled an image as presentation-wise it was too much, and trimmed a few sentences with some POV, unnecessary tidbits and no sources.

Asgardian 09:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Asgardian and anonymous: Rather than endlessly reverting back and forth on this, how about a compromise? Since Quicksilver is generally well-known for his original superspeed power, why not include that in the infobox with the precursor "Formerly:"? --GentlemanGhost 01:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In his most recent appearance, X-Factor: The Quick and the Dead, Quicksilver seems to get his powers of speed back. It seems likely that this will be a permanent change, reverting him back to the speedster we all know and love. In light of this, should his infobox still state his 'former' abilities of time-travel, etc? These were temporary abilities he had for a very short time, and it seems misleading to keep them in the main infobox.Primal Zed (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe cites Quicksilver as moving at 175mph, nothing like the speed of sound figure showin here. Is there a proper source for his moving at Mach 1? I've had an edit mentioning this reverted, not quite sure why.Nickpheas (talk) 10:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. All depowered mutants on wikipedia have a description of the powers they had. Just because he has new powers doesn't make his decades of fictional history irrelevant.

Also, how does vibrating molecules get you time duplicates? Or get you back from the future? Isn't he just time traveling? Where's the citation on that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.156.215 (talk) 00:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quicksilver is a character of literature. His timeline is not nearly as important as the cultural impact of the literature of his appearances as a whole. Therefore, if you are arguing that everything except his most "recent appearances" is irrelevant, you seem to be confusing him with a real person (and even real people have history in their entries). Quicksilver has appeared in hundreds of comics using superspeed powers. That is relevant. It's what he is known for and what his name describes. Deleting a few sentences about the character's historical description (while other characters currently depowered -- Magneto, for instance, or Protigy -- retain desciptions of their historical character) is dubious, at best, and most likely clearly incorrect. The total impact of Quicksilver as a character in comic literature is decades as a speedster mutant, and not whatever happened to him over the last months. If anything should be shortened, therefore, it is the current status that may, in the end, be a blip in the character's total history. So stop deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.0.196.186 (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is all complete rubbish. Quicksilver is not a speed character anymore. He has lost that power, and the whole point of this site is to keep things up to date with what is CURRENT, and since he is no longer a speedster, it makes absolutely zero sense to keep talking about him as if he still is one. And it is also completely unneeded to continue to go into detail about his powers as if he still has them when they no longer exist. You also have no reason to say that what is currently going on will be nothing but a "blip" because you have no proof of that. So until he either gets his speed powers back or gets new ones, then it is you who needs to stop changing the article to stuff that is no longer relevant.68.34.51.231 19:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terms like "rubbish" is, perhaps, your replacement for reason? It doesn't overrule the major cultural impact of a the character if, say, Sherlock Holmes was once written early on as a user of cocaine, or if he was written late to be a crossdresser. Those might be interesting sidenotes but, as a character of literature, it's his total impact as a solver of mysteries that is most relevant, without regard to what came last. You would not delete his mystery solving because his last appearance is "most current" and, similarly, the orignal creater of Quicksilver, who is not the one constantly adapting him, made Quicksilver relevent by Wikipedia standards before the period you appear to be obsessing over. Your "what is CURRENT" is your obsession, not Wikipedias. Continue to delete that, as a comic character, Quicksilver is know as a speedster, and it will be replaced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.0.196.186 (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't see you deleting every scrap of information on Magneto's powers, because he has "most currently" become powerless in the comics. Remember, what is current must overshadow all, correct? Contradicting much?

You do not run wikipedia. You have zero right in saying what can and cannot be put up on the pages. I, however, am going by every other thing that I have seen done by people who have actual clout around here. Putting things up in their most current status is the normal practice of what to do. For example, Chamber and Jubilee have always been known through their Generation X appearences, and her much longer before, especially her cartoon appearance, but recently they went through major overhauls, and their pages changed accordingly. Jubilee is even arguably a more recognizable character than Quicksilver, yet I don't see you forcing them to keep her and Chamber's pages like their most recognizable forms. Contradicting much? I do not change Magneto's page because his status is very clearly up in the air right now as to whether or not he is truly depowered, so there is no one way to say it, so it's left as is, which is how things are done around here. Maybe when you realize this site isn't your own personal playground, you'll catch on.68.34.51.231 01:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quicksilver's history is decades longer in literature than either Chamber or Jubilee. More importantly, you are not simply adding the most current, you are obsessing with deleting more of the past/most longstanding/most cultural impact information. Since your information is available in both versions, and your version deletes information, the personal playground label applies better to you.

Image:SonofM-2.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 04:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Quicksilver.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 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) 14:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The current image for Quicksilver seems very outdated and not very detailed. Does anyone argue that the image should be replaced with something more modern and more detailed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.137.34 (talk) 19:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bad choice of image. I think I could get a better idea of Quicksilver's visual appearance by checking the article on Syndrome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.178.141.62 (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added information about the new Quciksilver miniseries, taken from the marvel publishing catatlogue.90.241.50.99 (talk) 18:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we need to revisit the infobox image since we've got more than a little back and forth on it.

Right now three options have been presented:

• Image:Quicksilver.png
• Image:Avengers-75.jpg
• Image:Quicksilver avengers.jpg

Looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Style guidance#Superhero box images, none of them is perfect.

Going down the guideline points:

1. Fair use criteria:
   • In general, all three meet this. The covers could be knocked down to 300px across, which is relatively minor. The only major snag is that the cover of The Avengers #185 needs a full FUR.
2. Needed elements:
   • Posture, facing, and inclusion of at least the head and torso.
     • Again, in general all three meet the first two points.
   • Contorted image.
     • The Avengers #75 does show a contorted Quicksilver. There are some ways this would work for a speedster, but this really isn't one of them.
   • Hidden elements/obscured images.
     • The Avengers #75 has a good chunk of the torso hidden.
     • The Avengers #185, due to the nature of the image, is a blurry representation of the character.
   • Coloring
     • Of the three, the PNG is the worst at representing the character's costume colors.
3. Image focus/ additional elements.
   • Both of the covers have trouble here since Quicksilver isn't the sole, or primary focus of either.
4. Iconic look:
   • Again, bearing the above in mind, all 3 meet this.

Looking at this, yes, the PNG most likely can be replaced, but the two covers aren't improvements.

Are there any other options?

- J Greb (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some other ideas.

• The cover for Quicksilver #1.
• Art from Magneto Rex #3.
• Art from New X-Men #132. --DrBat (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of the 6, I'd say the one from New X-Men works best, but lets give Asgardian a chance to comment on this aspect. - J Greb (talk) 11:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would cast my vote for the cover of Quicksilver #1, as it's a nice action shot that puts the character in context. A cover is always preferable to a photoedited shot from a panel as the white background makes the image look too clinical. It should also be a drawcard for the layman. Asgardian (talk) 06:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except "the ideal image is a full-body, three-quarter picture of the character standing straight with no background." --DrBat (talk) 03:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it isn't used in the 'box, what exactly is the cover of The Avengers #185 bringing to the article? It looks a heck of a lot like redundant decoration right now. - J Greb (talk) 22:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The Yesterday Quest set the twins on the path to their true origin as the children of Magneto. Very important storyline. I'm really busy right now, but will get back to this tomorrow.

Asgardian (talk) 06:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The story line is, yes, but is the image of the cover fundamental in a readers understanding of that? - J Greb (talk) 11:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haera what you are saying, but that falls down on artistic merit and also spirit on intent - that is, promoting interest in the hobby. Many, many SHB images are covers. This is no biggie.

Asgardian (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, where are we on this folks?

Asgardian (talk) 06:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My comment ("Except "the ideal image is a full-body, three-quarter picture of the character standing straight with no background.") was never replied to. --DrBat (talk) 22:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it wasn't. That really does mean the article gets bounce back, or to no current image.

I can see Asgardian point about the Perez image. And looking at the site you reffing for Quicksilver 1, there is a good compromise, assuming we can find out where it was originally published - this one. It implies movement, uses the prevalent coloring, and is a full, uncontorted body shot. - J Greb (talk) 23:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Actually... back stepping the article at this is a good idea. - J Greb (talk) 23:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

That image is from the Busiek/Perez era on Avengers (vol. 3). I can find this issue. I've no objection that one either, so as long it isn't that horrid Martinez 3/4. We need his whole body on the cover or in the panel.

Asgardian (talk) 09:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ok with that image too. --DrBat (talk) 15:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tis' done.

Asgardian (talk) 09:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - it ticks all the boxes but I feel it doesn't contain enough out-of-universe material and it is that area that will need to be expanded for the article to progress further. (Emperor (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

OK...

So we had an uncredited, blurry mutant teathered to a cell... Adding anything based on that to this article is speculation at best, original research at worst.

Please, find a reliable, verifiable, secondary source that identifies the character as Quicksilver before adding it back in.

- J Greb (talk) 18:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given how this seems to be a "Force the fan spec in" issue, the page is going to be semi protected for a few days to give people a chance to actually find that reference.

- J Greb (talk) 19:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'In 2006, IGN named Quicksilver #23 on their list of "The Top 25 X-Men Of All Time" commenting that "Quicksilver was the shining example of a villain turned good."'

Will people please, please stop changing this. It is a quote. Quote's just don't get edited because time passes. Adding 'at the time' is not necessary and shouldn't be put in; of course the description is of the character in an earlier incarnation, it is from 2006.

If IGN made a comment that Wolverine was the best X-Man of 2010, then the quote won't be changed as time passes or if he quit, because the quote was made 2010.

If that was the case, then all of the introductory quotes on Magneto's claiming that Magneto is a villain should be changed to 'at the time', because he is now an X-Man. An example:

'Sir Ian McKellen portrayed Magneto throughout the entire X-Men film series. He was, at the time, ranked number 1 by IGN's Top 100 Comic Book Villains list, was listed number 17 in Wizard's Top 100 Greatest Villains Ever list, and was ranked as the 9th Greatest Comic Book Character Ever in Wizard's list of the 200 Greatest Comic Book Characters of All Time, the second highest villain at the time on that list.'

But, do we do that? No, because the quote was made at the time of his villainy, and as such remain. If Quicksilver has become a 'villain' then it does not change the fact that in 2006 IGN classed him as the 'shining example of a villain turned good', which was correct at the time and the quote shouldn’t be edited. 195.194.150.129 (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can 'someone' please stop removing all sourced and relevant detail in the Ultimate section? Every Ultimate Marvel character from Ultimate Nick Fury to Ultimate Captain America has a description of what part the character actually plays in the narrative. If you remove that, then what is the point of even having the section. Removing accurate, sourced, necessary information does not improve the article; it greatly hinders it. 195.194.150.129 (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• This is information is already at a gist. Putting in relevant information in is not 'fanish'. Go to any character's Ultimate section and I guaranty that it actually allows the reader to know what part the character played in the narrative. Just stating that the character is fast does not give people any information at all about the character. There is no reason why this cannot be in. If you have any problems with this, leave a detailed comment on this talk page, as opposed to reverting edits with pointless summaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.150.129 (talk) 09:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Quicksilver is eventually lured into a trap by the Earth-616 Machine Man and while destroyed[51] eventually returns.[52]'

This sentence is wrong. They are two completely different characters, however your sentence states that the same character later returns, however it is a completely different version of the character from another universe. This sentence is completely incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.150.129 (talk) 09:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Quicksilver is eventually lured into a trap by the Earth-616 Machine Man and while destroyed another alternate universe eventually appears'

Is an incredibly sloppy way of putting this, and gives absolutely no information. It is worded confusingly. He is destroyed but an alternate universe appears? What exactly is that supposed to mean? The information has not been 'corrected', it has been made even more confusing and wrong than the last edit. If all you are going to do is remove relevant information without giving any reason, then please stop editing.

I have given a variety of valid, appropriate reasons as to why this information is needed, but you seem completely unable to even form one reasonable sentence on this talk page as to why you keep deleting stuff. You are not improving this article. Stop reverting edits that contain necessary, sourced information and start commenting on this talk page. Explain yourself properly so that everyone can understand your stance. 195.194.150.129 (talk) 10:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Firstly, I'd suggest taking the emotion out of it. I'd also have a hard look at what you are reverting and you have removed legitimate sources. Now, I've expanded slightly on the zombies section, but that it all that is required. Again, we don't tell the story here. A brief and concise Plot Summary (without fannish overdetail) should be available at the article page for this series. That is where the information is expanded.

There is a more information in the Ultimate section, but once again, the real detail belongs at the various Ultimate pages.

Also, note that we just list the dates for a series from start to finish, not an entire choppy sequence of starts and stops that unfortunately was the Ultimates series. I was the editor that originally sourced and placed those dates, and now realize it is not the correct way to list the series.

Thank you. Asgardian (talk) 04:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this, if you have any questions, just ask. All I'd say is just keep your tone neutral and be careful not to revert legitimate technical changes. Asgardian (talk) 04:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • There is no emotion in this text. At all. The tone could not be any more neutral, as all it does is plainly describe what part the character played in the narrative, which is important for readers. Wikipedia is about giving information. What sources have I removed? How much sourced information have you removed with little explaination?

• • The way you left it now is wrong. Ultimate Quicksilver is not dead. If he were, he would not have been able to kill Moira or Cyclops, would he? You keep just removing correct information and replacing it with stuff that is just plain wrong.

• • Alternate reality versions of characters get seperate sections. MZ Quicksilver is not the same as MZR Quicksilver, so a seperate section is needed.

• • Also, not including relevant character information and just saying 'oh, well the Ultimates articles contain more stuff' is wrong. If that was the case, then why bother describing anything that 616 Quicksilver does? Go to any character's Ultimate section, or any alternate version of the character for that matter. Will the section contain actual, correct information about the character? Yes, of course it will.

• • You keep saying that you are correcting details, but all you are doing is removing relevant, correct details and replacing them with vague, wrong details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.150.129 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You are required to sign all posts. Thank you. Asgardian (talk) 20:47, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • That's more of a general guideline than requirement.
  • You did not address any of these points, which leads me to believe that you have no comeback.
  • Which means that you are removing relevant information for no reason.
  • Which is purposefully decreasing this article's quality.
  • Which is vandalism.
  • You are required not to vandalize Wikipedia's articles.195.194.150.129 (talk) 10:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually it is a requirement to sign all posts. It is also common courtesy. Your assumptions aside, you've removed accurate and sourced information that reflects the changes in the Ultimates storyline, without being fannish or colloquial. I would think that the death of Quicksilver's sibling and death of father which forces him into the same role as being very relevant and far from being vandalism. Also, that's all that is needed for the MZR section. Asgardian (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you made a blind revert and did not address the above? Asgardian (talk) 02:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both Magneto and the Scarlet Witch are indexed under "Jewish Superheroes". Shouldn't Quicksilver be, as well? 38.111.35.2 (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are they Jewish? I always had the impression that they were Roma. And after the Uncanny Avengers retcon, it's even more questionable.Nickpheas (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Magneto is most definitely Jewish, yes. “ Writer Chris Claremont stated that Menachem Begin was an inspiration for Magneto's development, as David Ben-Gurion was for Professor X … Before the publication of X-Men: Magneto Testament, Magneto's personal background and history were invented[22] in Uncanny X-Men #150 (Aug. 1981). He was portrayed as a Jewish Holocaust survivor; while searching for his wife Magda, a Sinti, Magneto maintained a cover identity as a Sinti.[3] This created confusion among some readers as to Magneto's heritage,[23] until his Jewish background was confirmed in Magneto: Testament.[1][24]“ — from https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/Magneto_(Marvel_Comics)#Publication_history

tharsaile (talk) 13:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Said section is #3 in the contents, but #1&2 are so long that it appears halfway down the page. I've never heard of the character until I saw the recent theatrical x-men clip; preceding said section, little mention of the high magnitude of his abilities are given beyond the over-simplified notion of 'extreme speed'. In the case of the X-men, each character is largely defined by a single ability that should be a part of their relative introductions. One should either move the powers above the large blocks of vague-context history, or expand the introduction to greater explain what seems to be one of the most powerful characters in comics, despite their seemingly trivial role in the flexy rainbow they call their 'multiverse'.

• • ED** I've surfed the articles of his siblings, and they suffer from the same issue. [In fact, [Polaris](https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/Polaris_(comics)) has her 'unique powers' description 3/4ths of the way down. From what I've seen, 'comics' seem to follow the same template, so its' very likely this may very well be a mata-issue deserving of rephrasing beyond this specific article; i just don't know where to C&P this comment.

Ghostwo 09:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

is Quicksilver part of the X-Men copyright? given his appearance in both movie and the copyright associated... who owns his character? can we have some legal information on him? 116.88.128.63 (talk) 03:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quicksilver (comics). 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140312224807/http://newsle.com/article/0/129185144/ to http://newsle.com/article/0/129185144/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 00:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be Pietro Maximoff because it is his real name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kravenger (talk • contribs) 03:26, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He's had about four different 'real' names while maintaining the same superhero name for over 55 years. What will people actually search for?Nickpheas (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for his being Serbian? As far as I can remember he was generally said to be from a made up Balkan microstate. Transia or something like that?Nickpheas (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox refers to him as a "human mutate", but the page does not refer to this term anywhere else, and nor is there a citation for this distinction between "human mutant" and "human mutate." I'm going to remove this term in the hope that someone will restore it with a citation. Airbornemihir (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Airbornemihir (talk) 02:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One or more images currently used in this article have been nominated for deletion as violations of the non-free content criteria (NFCC).

You can read more about what this means and why these files are being nominated for deletion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Image deletion nominations for NFCC 8 and 3a.

You can participate at the deletion discussion(s) at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 April 28. If you are not familiar with NFCC-related deletion discussions, I recommend reading the post linked above first.

Sincerely, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:PietroMaximoff-MCU.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 non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter Maximoff.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 non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 22:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]