Talk:Jane Foster

Civil War Partner
Who is the other female doc Jane partners with in the Civil War series? The one that helps her fix up a beaten Spider-Man. Lots42 (talk) 04:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The picture
I know there is no mistaking whom Jane is in the picture, but we should have one with just Jane in it. Lots42 (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Siege
The Siege issues of Thor are #607-609, none of which feature Jane Foster so it would be incorrect to title a section as Siege. --TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Third party willing to help mediate
Two editors each with a history of doing very good work in WikiProject Comics appear to be at the beginnings of what may be an edit war. I'd like to offer a disinterested ear to help these two good editors resolve their differences.

It seems to revolve around whether her Status is "Active" and whether her Team affiliations should include the Secret Avengers.

My first step will be to see how WikiProject Comics defines Status and Team affiliations. I'll also go read whatever discussion there is on their talk pages. I'll be back. In the meantime, the two editors can let me know if they're willing to have a third party get involved. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * "Status" does not seem to be part of Template:Infobox comics character. Offhand, having a line for whether a character is currently being used in comics is impractical, since characters get used in small and large ways over time, even if they don't make an appearance for a while. Are they "active" if, like the Golden Age Jack Frost in an issue of Captain America, appear in one comic after being unused for many years? We don't know if they'll be used again a month or two or three from now. When would "Status" change in "Inactive"? The "Status" line seem as if it would be a WP:DATED vio


 * The guidelines state, "Alliances include any current or previous team affiliations. Please stick to notable affiliations." The phrase "notable" is open to interpretation, which is problematic: Does "notable" refer to the affiliated group being notable, or to whether one's affiliation with a certain group is notable and not tangential? I would say, prima facie, that the Secret Avengers is a notable group. The question then is, is her affiliation notable?


 * That will take some research. Anything anyone would like to add about the points raised above would be welcome. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Without going into my sadly disorganized stacks of comics, but going just from what I read here, it looks as if Jane Foster works with the Secret Avengers the way a civilian employee or volunteer may work with police. They are not a formal member of the police force, but they are affiliated with the police. It appears to be not dissimilar from Rick Jones' affiliation with the Avengers.


 * Are there comments for or against this reasoning? --Tenebrae (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with the statements about Active versus Inactive. I was more fighting about the removal of her association with the Secret Avengers. I think she was notable in her affiliation with them. Spidey  104  19:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Secret Avengers links to Civil War and it doesn't have it anymore. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 21:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Not sure what "it doesn't have it anymore" means. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:39, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It means that Secret Avengers is not on the civil war article anymore. That's why I removed it. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 23:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I think I see the disparity. The team, or at least the comic by that name, continues to exist. Jane Foster was affiliated with it in the past, the way Rick Jones or the Scarlet Witch, say, were affiliated with the Avengers in the past. I'm not sure what the Civil War connection is, since the team would still be part of the record even if it were disbanded, like the 1970s team the Champions. Does this make sense? --Tenebrae (talk) 08:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * To clarify the Civil War era Secret Avengers is not the same nor has any affiliation with the current Secret Avengers team. Also we do typically include membership in past teams even if that team is now defunct such as West Coast Avengers or the Great Lakes Avengers. So the question now becomes did Foster have a notable relationship with the group? --TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Even Brian Boru as the editor removing the information agrees that she was part of the team. I would have to dig out old comics (and I don't have all of the Civil War related issues so it would be incomplete) to count how many times she was present, but going from memory alone I thought she was present often enough to warrant her inclusion. Spidey  104  14:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Secret Avengers (Civil War)| dosen't even link to secret avengers just civil war and it makes no sense to link to a page with the team roster gone from the article.Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Why can the team just be listed and not linked anywhere? Example: "Secret Avengers (Civil War team)" --TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That could work. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 15:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd agree to that. Spidey  104  16:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Part 2
The infobox also lists Heroes for Hire but there is no mention of this in body of the article. Can somebody who is familiar with her involvement with the group please fix this?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I just left it there 'cause I assumed she was a part of it. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 15:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I love it when we all get together and work things out like this! Great suggestion, TT.


 * Now it's just up to someone to do the honors.


 * And, yeah, I was wondering about Heroes for Hire myself... --Tenebrae (talk) 16:37, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no knowledge about whether she was involved with Heroes for Hire (in any of its many incarnations) or not, so I was leaving that alone. Spidey  104  16:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In that case I think we should remove it until someone can give a confirmation.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I got rid of it. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 19:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The Avengers
See Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jane Foster (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 https://web.archive.org/web/20120422175127/http://www.boxofficemagazine.com/reviews/2012-04-marvels-the-avengers to http://www.boxofficemagazine.com/reviews/2012-04-marvels-the-avengers
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/toldja-patty-jenkins-confirmed-as-thor-2-director/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/natalie-portman-chris-hemsworths-wife-elsa-pataky-was-my-stand-in-for-kissing-scene-in-thor-the-dark-world-2013312

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

New, More Relevant Picture.
The fact is that Jane Foster is now Thor, and that is not going to be undone any time soon. The picture above is the only picture Marvel has released featuring both Jane Foster and her persona of Thor. The power and ability sections don't fit the picture of a nurse. Nurseline247 (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * And don't you dare say RECENTISM. Amadeus Cho became the Hulk in 2015, Thor in 2014, and yet Cho's page main picture is of him as the Hulk. Why? Because it shows both him as himself and as the Hulk.


 * Yes, WP:RECENTISM. The version of Foster shown in this image is her cancer stricken form, not her most historically recognizable form.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jane Foster (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 https://www.webcitation.org/5zva548wX?url=http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/07/13/natalie-portman-joins-thor-cast-chris-hemsworth-confirmed-as-lead/ to http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/07/13/natalie-portman-joins-thor-cast-chris-hemsworth-confirmed-as-lead/
 * Added tag to http://marvel.com/news/video_games/26111/go_inside_avengers_alliance_civil_war

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

There is an unclear sentence in the article.
In the section titled "Early history" under the section titled "Fictional character history", there is an unclear sentence which requires correction in order to be properly understood. So the question is ...

SHOULD THIS ... Sif, seeing Thor still has feelings for Foster, saves Foster's life by merging their life-forces. Thor #236 (June 1975). ... BECOME THIS ... Sif, seeing Thor still has feelings for Foster, saves Foster's life by merging her own life-force with Foster's. Thor #236 (June 1975). ... OR THIS ... Sif, seeing Thor still has feelings for Foster, saves Foster's life by merging Thor's and Foster's life-forces. Thor #236 (June 1975). ... ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.77.201 (talk) 12:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)