Talk:Thanos/Archive 2

Strength
Some editors seem to believe that numbers correlate to strength and that someone with a higher number then someone else cannot be beaten by that person. Or whatever. In terms of Marvel, in terms of the story written, it's possible for anyone to beat anyone. Of course, now I am going to use a DC example but I think it works. Connor Hawke and Ray Palmer would lose to Darkseid (yes, I recognize the irony of mentioning him) in a fist fight but in a JLA (alternate timeline) they use their abillities to kill Darkseid. Strength mattered not one whit. And if I am completely misinterpeting editor's attidues...ah, well, it's still a good thing for any Wiki editor/comic book fan to keep in mind. Lots42 (talk) 01:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Nah, that's obviously not true. Thanos is listed as a few times physically stronger than calm Thor, but is not as good a combattant. Heck train a 90 pound weakling in wielding a katana and put him agains against a world champion weight lifter, and he'd probably win, as one hit would be fatal. Dave (talk) 17:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I am confused. What is not true. I completely agree with what you are saying. Lots42 (talk) 02:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not true that I think strength is the only decisive factor in a fight. However, it should be noted, and this is coming directly from George Scott, former world boxing champion, that lack of glamour and mythos notwithstanding (Karelin-style) wrestlers are easily among the most dangerous 1-on-1 unarmed fighters on the planet, far, far more so than heavyweight boxers, and most alternatives where kicks are allowed as well. Virtually any opponent would go down in seconds in close quarters. Armed combat is a wholly different issue. As I roughly remember Emin Boztepe saying in a local fighting magasine many years ago, someone holding a decent sword for almost the first time is equivalent to an unarmed fighter who's trained intensely for 15 years. That said, this isn't remotely real life, or characters with real human vulnerabilities, and force of attack seems to have very little to do miss mass and acceleration. Technically, almost any speedster should hit a lot harder than almost any strongman, but that doesn't satisfy the medium's story format. Dave (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Darkseid and Mongul
I seem to recall something about Starlin creating Thanos as a homage to Darkseid and then, at DC, and with obvious irony, creating Mongul as a homage to Thanos. Does anyone else recall this, and can they find a source? Kelvingreen (talk) 23:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I also recall this, but don't remember from where. Maybe someone else knows? Dave (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It certainly seems to be the case that Ultimate Thanos is based on taking the "Thanos as variant Darkseid" concept and running with it. Daibhid C (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yup, it even fitted in explicit counterparts for the Forever People, and put Ronan, and Terrax (sort of) into 'semi-Orion & Kalibak' roles. Dave (talk) 10:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Captainmarvel28.jpg
Image:Captainmarvel28.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 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 09:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * This has since been replaced as it was pulled without discussion. Have made some other addition but not kept very bias and emotive retelling of story. Please just convey the facts.

Asgardian (talk) 06:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Suicide?
If Ultimate Thanos regularly kills himself, I feel it should be noted in the article... Lots42 (talk) 04:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required
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 Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Done - solid B with plenty of potential to go higher. (Emperor (talk) 03:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC))

The Re-edits
There seems to be a consistent pov reverting of matter-of-fact accounts of stories that did not show Galactus as omnipotent and infallible. That said, a few of the old issues seem to be abandoned, so we may be getting somewhere. It should be noted that I don't at all mind (and actually appreciate) the cleaning of my sentence structures, just if the context will be easily misread from what actually was explicitly shown or stated to happen.

The current issues seem to be the following:


 * Portraying the confrontation with Hunger as an even fight, rather than that Galactus was shown as completely ineffectual, and outright stating that his might was as nothing in comparison.
 * Portraying Galactus as completely unthreathened and undamaged at the time of the Fallen One's assault, which he wasn't. The point of the story was that Galactus was shown as still greatly weakened by the planetary impacts and nuclear arsenal combination, and that Thanos offered to save him due to his necessity for the natural order.
 * Thanos 'defeating' the Fallen One. - Which he didn't, he tricked it into defeating itself.
 * Alternately enslaving the 'cosmic entity'. - It's not nearly powerful enough to qualify as a cosmic entity.

Additionally there seems to be problems with me reworking the powers section, to be more in line with other entries listing examples of extent, such as Thor or Silver Surfer.
 * This includes citing Thanos blasts destroying a planet. - Drax recounted this tale of this earlier battle in his first appearance if I don't misremember.
 * Knocking Galactus off his feet. - Also correct, but Galactus was taken by surprise, which was also noted.
 * Absorbing enormous amounts of energy. - The understatement of the year, as Thanos literally absorbed the powers of a God.
 * Deflecting blasts. - A very limited assault from an amnesiac Beyonder.
 * Manipulating matter. - He healed the injuries of a companion while visiting the Kyln.
 * Using telekinesis. - Thanos controlled the movement of several small asteroids during his battle with the Fallen One.
 * Thanos' force shields protecting him from assaults by far more powerful foes, such as power-gem infused Champion of the Universe, Odin, or Galactus. - Technically he never stated out loud that he used the protection against Odin, even if these were established considerably earlier, so I could see removing it, but in any case Odin did say that he exerted himself in the final assault, as did Galactus. However, in both cited cases cases, Thanos was barely conscious afterwards.

Then again, Jim Starlin tends to power down any character in the room with one of his pet creations, alternately turn these far more stupid than they should be for the sake of convenience. In Marvel: The End there was no rational explanation for this 'even more powerful than the Infinity Gauntlet power source. It was just there for Thanos' convenience as usual, and the story featured the Living Tribunal in a team-up with the 'street-level' Marvel Heroes, without any of them being destroyed by the full multiverse-destroying level power release, and the first 6 Thanos comics directly followed this, so it was a pretty inane period to cite all in all. I might accept removing the absorbtion, or Galactus references in the powers section, but not in the earlier story description, as this would be misleading. Dave (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Two replies. 'The End' is an alternate universe story so the powers involved doesn't really matter. Lastly, long term revert wars, like what is happening here, stink. Three reverts in the same day gets someone in 'trouble', three reverts of the same in a week, well...come on, people. Just come on. Lots42 (talk) 09:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * There are some problems with the additions. Firstly, the term "vast" or even "vastly" is not used as it is nebulous and implies POV. "simultaneously multitasking" is also very clumsy and not in accordance with an article that must cater to comic affecionado and layman alike. I've fixed that by altering a few terms and still being able to present the events, without any POV. All that is needed is the facts, without spin. The entry on the Fallen One has also been corrected and again, just presents the facts.

I note that both edits do not do Galactus any favours: this may or may not be favouritism towards Thanos, but the problem is now sidelined as it is a straight account without interpretation. It is all there - there is no need to now lionize one character at the expense of another.

Finally, there is enough in the P & A section to convey an impression of Thanos' abilities. In this instance, the editor in question seems to be trying to deliberately make a point about how powerful Thanos is - again at the expense of other characters. We do not as a rule do "match ups" in P & A because they are meaningless to a layman and also doubly so because we are ultimately talking about fictional characters. If such things were to be included there would have to an entire ratings system, and such things are inherently flawed (eg. OHOTMU) as they are based on subjective judgements.

I hope this helps.

Asgardian (talk) 11:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Asgardian has repeatedly gladly used character-comparisons when it suits his purposes, including a claim that Loki (Marvel Comics) is more powerful than Doctor Strange based on a 60s appearance, long before Strange was boosted to cosmic entity levels, or a comparison at Odin (Marvel Comics), implying that the latter is only barely more powerful than Thanos and the Silver Surfer. He is also not having any problem with stating the extent of power shown for various characters, including Galactus and Silver Surfer such as Thanos blowing up a planet during a battle with Drax the Destroyer, even in his first appearance, before later power-ups. It should be noted that, unlike User:Asgardian I did still not censor these instances. The user in question has stated outright in my Talk page that he thinks Galactus is as powerful as the entities Eternity and Death, even though this has been repeatedly countered by nearly every single available official reference, and is methodically enforcing this view at every Wikipedia page he sees through exaggerated Galactus-hype, along with censoring of any instances that explicitly show the character to have limits, or even employing sockpuppets to this end. Including these instances matter-of-fact as explicitly stated, with no twisting whatsoever, along with the ones in favour, is the npov way of handling this.

Asgardian is currently twisting the information to imply that Galactus was comparable to Hunger, and edits out that he was shown and stated (by both Thanos and himself) to be almost killed by the planetary collission. Given that Galactus explicitly stated his power to be "as nothing" in comparison, that he had no effect whatsoever even on the tiny portal-entered part of the entity, while the immensely lesser difference of Thanos knocking Galactus off his feet and barely resisting an assault does merit a mention of being easily outmatched". Even in itself this is showing that Asgardian is pushing a very, very deceitful, selective, and insincere agenda.

Also, the Fallen One is still not a cosmic entity. That's hyperbole. And Thanos did not ignite the gas giant. He enraged the FO to knock itself out this way. That on the other hand is hyping Thanos beyond what was actually shown.

To quote Asgardian in deceit-mode, "I hope that this was helpful". Dave (talk) 11:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Just bumping this discussion as there has just been another round of reverts to the article. Can everyone discuss the changes here (rather than trying to impose their preferred version) and could I remind people to remain civil, and that extends to your edit comments too. (Emperor (talk) 13:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC))


 * All right. I'll try, but we pretty much detest each other at this point, and I have extremely little faith in that we will reach some form of agreement. Me and MobbOne had reached a compromise, but Asgardian simply ignored all that went before and reverted far back to his own edit, which is how it seems to continue, and while I'm very literal/matter of fact/point-by-point about what's actually shown in the issues, I'm pretty bad at sifting it down/keeping it brief, which can make my technically more factually reliable edits less visually appealing and brief/encyclopeadic.


 * I think the best solution would be if you, or/and some other neutral editor/s check up the issues in questions, and then take over the edits from there, to make certain that everything is factual, coherent with policies at other pages, and not the least bit twisted around, with none of us (David A, Asgardian, TheBalance) involved anymore. There should be a collection of all Thanos appearances available at isohunt, and I'd be extremely happy to get rid of the nuisance. (It would be even better if some comics editors could similarly keep the edits at related pages, such as Galactus in check as well, in a similar manner, as I don't really have the time for this anymore.)


 * If you don't have the time and/or energy, I can recommend User:Tenebrae, as he's generally a very professional, reliable, and reasonable editor, if somewhat too trigger-happy, and has little reason to like either myself or Asgardian, which should ensure neutrality, but I cannot guarantee that he's interested. Dave (talk) 17:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The page is on my watchlist and I'll go back through the edit history a bit. I'll also post a note on the Comics Project talk page asking for more eyes. (Emperor (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC))
 * Okay, it is on my watchlist. Hiding T 20:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank goodness you guys are here, E & H. This definitely is too big for just one outside volunteer!
 * I'm dragging myself back into the land of the living, and will try to make some suggestions in a day or a couple.... --Tenebrae (talk) 01:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Consistent misleading Thanos modifications by Galactus enthusiasts who claim to have read the story
User:Nightscream suggested that I present the argument here again. Here is a temporary image collage, which contains all of the inaccuracies in question, and is 'easily' skimmed as a reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thanos.jpg

The text I feel is misrepresentative is:

"Thanos discovers the truth and attempts to stop Galactus but is easily outmatched. As Hunger begins to enter their universe, Galactus stalls the entity until it adapts to his power, and Thanos fails to destroy the portal that separates it from the majority of its being. Thanos then distracts Hunger and forces Rigel-18 to collide with another planet while detonating a large nuclear arsenal at the point of impact. Galactus survives the explosion, and Hunger is believed destroyed, although a tiny remnant of the organism apparently survives by attaching itself to Galactus and then fleeing. Thanos states that although Galactus' intent was noble, his continued consumption of inhabited worlds will eventually unite the universal population against him, including Thanos himself."

The problems I had were the following:

It is mentioned that Thanos is easily outmatched by Galactus to (appropriately) keep the scales of the two separate and avoid misunderstandings, which is correct as Thanos states that his "personal power is lilliputan compared to [Galactus] might", and after blasting Galactus off his feet (with no actual damage), Thanos is almost unconscious from a single blast despite activating all of his shields. The problem is the suspicious combination with the soon following phrase: "Galactus stalls the entity until it adapts to his power", which gives the appearance that it is a roughly even confrontation. It is not. It is stated outright, first that Hunger is far higher up on the food chain than Galactus, as the latter eats planets, while Hunger eats entire 'dimensions'/universes. Later during the actual confrontation, that Galactus' power is "nothing compared to power backed by an entire reality" which Galactus affirms ("Yes. I sense this to be true"). Also he does not even manage to stall the small piece of Hunger between one frame and the next. :

Second, the sentence: "Galactus survives the explosion, and Hunger is believed destroyed". THis gives appearance that the entire Hunger entity is completely annihilated by the explosion while Galactus easily withstands it. Galactus is explicitly stated (by himself) to have "barely [survived]" and by Thanos to have had only "60% chance of survival", while Thanos' and Galactus' endeavour was always to "cut [Hunger] off from the bulk of [its] being"/stop it from entering, and later again "separated from the vast bulk of its being". The best way to word it would be to phrase it as: "Galactus "barely" survives the explosion, and the Hunger is believed cut off from the majority of its being", alternately "the entered segment of Hunger is believed destroyed".

Formerly I also had a problem with that it is stated that Galactus' intent was "noble". In fact Thanos repeatedly berates Galactus for "[breaking the] social contract with the rest of the universe" by "[consuming] without any regard to the effects of your ravaging". That the inhabitants of the Universe have "little sympathy for this gluttony" and will eventually "join forces to put an end to the peril that is you". Thanos merely states that finally attempting to find alternate sources of nourishment to populated planets was "the proper thing to do". He dismisses Galactus statement of a "manifest destiny" for "others [to] die so that I may live", observes that Galactus' "monstrous ego almost destroyed [him] and the Universe", and that he has "been given a second chance" to behave differently. However this has apparently been kept rectified. (For how long=? as the Galactus enthusiasts User:Asgardian and User:TheBalance have thus far kept modifying it to a misleading version at first chance regardless how long they have to wait.) Dave (talk) 21:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * should be scrubbed and replaced with publication history - in-universe overdetail of the sort we don't do. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. In-universe FCBs are just flawed. DCincarnate (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed again. However, it should be noted that I removed the "easily" reference days ago.  TheBalance (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems that we are going to get the usual silly behaviour from David, where he tries to keep the articles in-universe but that shouldn't stop us doing what needs to be done. Anyone want to start on intergrating the rest of the fictional history into the publication history? I would do it but I cannot start until tomorrow on such a big job. --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * My question is, why this obsession over a fictional matter and the constant accusations? People lying, cheating etc. And he thinks we are being uncivil... Asgardian (talk) 10:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * My manic-compulsive inability to let go when something is 'wrong' has been identical to your own, and at least I have a diagnosis (Asperger+ADD+bipolar mood swings) to explain it. As for the lying, that's the genuine interpretation I tend to get when something is blatantly misrepresented from the way it's spelled out in the book, and then repeatedly re-modified despite that the ones doing so have been unable to counter the rational arguments regarding the matter. In your case it also stems from that you've found my beef with lying funny, that you've claimed to have photographic memory despite instances wherein you have very clearly not represented the matter specifically as displayed in the books, that you have a history of repeated bans, and the tendency to repeatedly claim 'pov' as a convenient catch-all justification regardless whether any was present or not, or in fact severely cut down on what was present in the text. It is not something I do immediately. It has been after months of experience with you and TheBalance. Cameron is a relatively new editor and thus not fully aware of the circumstances, or that you both used to be much more severe than presently in the misrepresenting aspect. Dave (talk) 14:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Rob bank
Can anyone tell me in what issue of Spiderman, Thanos is shown robbing a bank

> I don't know anything about that, but in "Spidey Super Stories" #39, Thanos is on the hunt for the Cosmic cube and uses a Thanos-copter to track it down. He battles Spidey and the Cat (Hellcat), and is defeated and taken away by the police. Its hilarious. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 18 June 2006
 * Was that before or after Thanos tried to steal the Hostess Twinkies? Austinmayor (talk) 01:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Link to DC counterpart Darkseid?
To me, it seems that Thanos is quite similar to DC's Darkseid. They seem to originate from the same sort of concepts (the Darkseid page actually names Thanos Marvel's counterpart to Darkseid)... I'm not sure how to capture in the page itself, though. Besides just linking to Darkseid, it would of course be very interesting to have a description of the basic concepts from which both originate. Don't have a source for that, though. Hope someone around here does! -- Hugo, 158.64.77.233 (talk) 11:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds like OR to me. Lots42 (talk) 02:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And the counterpart thing was just an aspect of a story in the DC VS MARVEL story. Lots42 (talk) 02:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Eternals
At what point was Thanos linked in to Kirby's Eternals - that was not part of Starlin's original version. -- Beardo 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Good question, and sadly I've no idea where to begin looking. I know the Eternals, Deviants and Celestials weren't originally meant to be part of the core Marvel Universe, and Thanos appeared approx. three years before those guys first appeared.  --Dr Archeville 18:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Probably the best source with which to find out the possible answer to that is this website: http://www.corvusonline.net/thanos/thanos.html It's probably the most comprehensive and detailed website devoted to any single comic book character that I've ever seen. If the answer's not in there, then I dunno if there's any other place on the web to find it. Odin&#39;s Beard 00:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Avengers, I think. I remember a story featuring Eros, Maelstrom and the Eternals - in which the Titans and Eternals realised they were related. Not sure if that's the very first reference to it, but... --Mrph 00:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You are correct. This tale was told in AVENGERS #246-248 (1984), where Starfox and Wasp crash one of Sersi's parties, and they all end up in Olympia. We learn that Starfox is the son of A'lars, who in turn was the brother of Zuras. My thanks to WarlordKro for this info! --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 2 December 2006


 * On Eternals, to say that Thanos' mother was a Skrull is a big claim. It needs sourcing to have any credibility. I sincerely hope it is not that idiot Bendis "retro-ruining" everything.

Someone provide an issue if possible.

Asgardian (talk) 11:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The end IS Canon and was made such in thanos's own series. Only Adam and thanos remember it though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.40.194 (talk) 21:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What If
Do we really need a What If section? There are soooo many of those alternate realities. 21:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Bias
Is the part of Thanos' history covering Thanos: The End as free of bias as it could be? The length dedicated to that one mini-series and certain phrases such as "the cunning being that he is" seem to show to much favortism. I do not argue that he isn't cunning, but that is discussed under the powers section. On the length part, several paragraphs are dedicated to it compared to the much smaller onces covering his previous exploits.

Doesn't suggest any bias to me at all. Thanos "the cunning being that he is" is like stating something about how vastly strong beings like the Hulk and Thor are. The mini-series istelf was called Marvel: The End, it just happened to revolve around Thanos' latest bid to gain omnipotence. I feel, however, that it deserves it's own section or an explanation because "The End" series in and of itself isn't canon, especially with the way they worked it out as to where Thanos gives up his omnipotence, yet again. Odin&#39;s Beard 01:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no explicit indication that "The End" was not canon. In fact the first issue of Thanos's limited series makes a vague reference to the events in "Thanos: The End" in a dialogue between Thanos and Adam Warlock.

Thanos: "The first day of my reign ended with my destroying the entire universe in a fit of pique. To restore it to being meant having to renounce the might I had so desperately striven to gain. Of course you remember arriving just as I was in the midst of struggling with this dilemma."

Regardless of your interpretations of this dialogue, personal assumptions should not be written in Wikipedia articles. There is nothing conclusive to indicate that "The End" was an alternate universe. I therefore suggest that point be edited out. --robbie smith (talk) 16:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Starlin's creation of character
Haven't seen any information on the circumstances or inspiration that led to Jim Starlin's creating of Thanos, Drax, Kronos, etc. Even in the linked Starlin interview, although he credits Jack Kirby as his chief youthful inspiration, he never goes into if Thanos was a hommage/take-off/variation of Kirby's DC "Fourth World" creation of just a couple of years earlier, Darkseid (which I always assumed it was, and I was reading both the Jimmy Olsen/Forever People/New Gods/Mister Miracle and Iron Man/Captain Marvel/Marvel Two-In-One/Avengers/Adam Warlock stuff as it was coming out). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.120.224 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 12 May 2007
 * I don't have a link (I think it was in Roy Thomas' intro to Marvel Masterworks: Captain Marvel volume 3), but Thano's design was based on the Fourth World character Metron, not Darkseid. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Subhead and organization
"Character and publication history" is a mash-up of real-life publication details and made-up, in-universe fiction. The consensus of WikiProject Comics is that real-life and fictional elements are separate in comics articles. This is settled consensus, and if there's insistence, I can give links to the appropriate discussions and guidelines. These need to be separated, as they recently were, with consensus approval, at Adam Warlock. -- Tenebrae (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, this was another ill-conceived notion of Asgardian's and it has resulted in a mess. It needs rewriting in an out-of-universe tone. (Emperor (talk) 15:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC))


 * I plan to begin work on this soon. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Possible role in Avengers movie(s)
It's been established that one of the principle villains of the first Avengers movie, which is anticipated in 2012 or 2013, will be Loki seeking possession of the Cosmic Cube. Rumors have been circulating that Thanos and the Infinity Gauntlet (the latter apparently glimpsed in the Thor film) may play a role as well. My best guess would be that they will tease the audience regarding Thanos toward the end of the upcoming film, and then use him and the IG for one or more epic sequels. Obviously, as a rumor, this doesn't belong in the Thanos entry proper, but I thought I would put a heads-up here for those who follow the character: keep your eyes open. Might as well add a source: http://movies.ign.com/articles/110/1108431p1.html Praghmatic (talk) 06:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

One Mr. Jeffrey Wright was spotted on the Cleveland set of the Avengers...rumor is he is going to play Thanos. Marvel has done an amazing job of maintaining secrecy over who makes up Loki's army, who the other villain(s) will be, etc. I cannot wait to see an updated and complete cast list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guidorulz (talk • contribs) 22:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense Thanos would show, since we've seen the Tesseract(Cosmic Cube) and Infinity Gauntlet, both relics associated with that particular villain. But until May 4th, it should be treated as a rumor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guidorulz (talk • contribs) 16:27, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

it's a spoiler if true and shouldn't be posted until april 26th when it can be confirmed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.5.158 (talk) 17:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you mean May 4.Argento Surfer (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Movie is out in countries other than the US right now, and it can be confirmed that he appears in the movie. 82.56.145.193 (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

He does make a brief appearance at the end of the film. The Australian release date is 25 April 2012, I can't comment on other countries though. http://villagecinemas.com.au/Movies/The-Avengers.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.4.93 (talk) 09:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I can confirm the movie came out in the UK on the 26th April 2012 and in the middle of the credits, the usual Marvel "post-credits" scene played out in which a figure who bears a heavy resemblance to the character does appear. 193.61.254.32 (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

THE AVENGERS (2012)
Kevin Feige has officially confirmed that the character in the post credits scene during the film was indeed Thanos. I have changed the article accordingly and included an updated reference. I also removed the statement relating Loki's scepter to the Mind Gem, changing it to a link to the related article. Zargabaath 09:40, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed to death on the film talk page where a consensus has been reached. and I just opened a new section to discuss this link there. Until a new consensus is reached, I don't see why you'd make your own edits and then hide them so no one else can change the passage. I'm reverting until a consensus is reached.--Williamsburgland (talk) 15:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * So the consensus seems to be that it's fine to call him Thanos as long as it's not in the plot section of the film's article. I've added your ref, though feel free to revert to your version, just please keep the format open so other editors can participate too. There's a not section in there now that refers users to the talk page. --Williamsburgland (talk) 16:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your concern, and I have made the reversion. Everything I did was well-intended, I assure you. There was already a hidden referral to the film's talk page prior to my edits; I was attempting to localize the discussion regarding this article, as that is the purpose of this page. Regardless of any discussion on other articles, an official and reputable source has published the information, which is sufficient under Wiki policy to make an edit (the standard is verfiability, not user consensus). I do not recall making any change that was not open to discussion or further edits, and was in fact trying to encourage discussion and prevent vandalism by referring to the talk page first. Zargabaath 10:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand, and apologies if I jumped the gun there, I was a little behind the times on the ref thing... it's just that there was a major issue on the movie page with people reverting without discussion before that ref came to light. Thanks for reinstating your edits but leaving it open for other editors, I had added the hidden note to discourage blind reverting. --Williamsburgland (talk) 21:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Consistently villainous?
I don't feel confident enough to straight up change it myself, but that seems inaccurate. The end of IG (he is again referred to as villain in the article...?) and the whole of IW, at least (as well as perhaps "The End," alternate universe or otherwise), seem to suggest a more complex "moral" position for ol' purple-puss. Nevermind no real mention of his habit of "subconsciously" setting up his own defeat? Mayhap I always read too much into the Infinity books, but it seemed to me that Starlin was writing a non-villain by this time, considering he tended to work for the good of the universe. Okay, not so much in The End, but even at, um, the end of that series...Am I crazy? Anyone else see this? Certainly most souls after Starlin (or even contemporaneous to him) tend to write Thanos as a pretty obnoxiously one dimensional character (strange the way that Death-worshiping suddenly reappeared...though Starlin never really wrote about it after IG). Er, I'm rambling a bit, but the central point remains: is "villain" REALLY an accurate title for Thanos? Or at least, is "consistently" an accurate word? At the very least, some of those appearances were "antihero" as he was working in the interest of the universe and not for the domination or destruction of others. FangsFirst (talk) 17:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * In an interview in Marvel Age #90 (June 1990), Starlin said that Thanos was a complex character, and that his good side would be revealed in Thanos Quest. I don't think he ever meant for him to be a strict villain.Argento Surfer (talk) 14:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree completely. But everyone else seems to suggest things to the contrary--indeed, this article still says he joined the Watch "reluctantly" which is utter nonsense. He was reluctant to take hold of the reality gem, and in that respect his joining was reluctant, but he agreed he was the best one to hold it. He then asked Warlock for aid, which hardly indicates reluctance. I just don't understand the tendency of any attempts to explain the character, in short or in full, to simply pretend that entire 10-12 years never happened when it was almost entirely written by his creator.FangsFirst (talk) 23:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Avengers Assemble
The Avengers Assemble comic is listed in the article as being out of the mainstream Marvel universe. However, aside from the fact that he has not explained how Thanos, Star-Lord, and Gamora are alive again, Bendis seems to be trying to establish that the book is within the mainstream universe. For example, he mentions that Hawkeye has a girlfriend, and it is not Natasha. Gronteam (talk) 10:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. There's an IP user who has repeatedly been removing the AA material from various articles, and I guess I missed an edit to this one. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

"Thanos War" vs "Cosmic Cube"
There's a dispute between another editor and me about the title of a section in the FCB. I think "First and Second Thanos War" is the best title because it's descriptive, and what they're popularly known as. While not billed that way originally, I know they were referred to by editors and writers after the fact. I would prefer not to dig through old letter columns for the evidence. User:Thenightshift believes "Cosmic Cube and Infinity Gems" is a "more accurate and not a subjective phrase." If consensus sides with him, I submit it should read "soul gems," as that's what they were known as at the time. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Hah! Hardly a dispute, friend. I've no objection to the use of "Soul Gems". The problem with the other tag is that it isn't a formally acknowledge term. Thenightshift (talk) 03:03, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanos post The Avengers (2012 Movie)
I noticed this posted under In Other Media > Film


 * "In September 2012, it was confirmed that Thanos will appear in the upcoming 2014 Guardians of the Galaxy film and the 2015 untitled Avengers sequel.[49]"

It doesn't seem very accurate. Even the source provided doesn't confirm much but only speculates. I am not able to find any other source either. I think it should be removed or at least modified to "rumoured" rather than "confirmed".

69.196.158.86 (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2013 (UTC) R - Jun 14, 2013
 * This interview with Jim Starlin is much more direct. It's also the real source, the one currently in the article links to it. It would probably be a good idea to change the language from "it was confirmed" to "Jim Starlin said in an interview" Argento Surfer (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Then this interview with Whedon makes it sound like he won't. Argento Surfer (talk) 23:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Psychological origin?
If Starlin came up with the character in psych class, as the article says, isn't he more likely named after the term for the death drive rather than directly after the Greek god? Especially since his heroic brother is named Eros - the gods of those names weren't opposed forces, but the Freudian concepts are. 86.138.212.22 (talk) 21:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Without a citation, the part about being named after the greek god should be removed. While you're probably correct, your idea shouldn't be added unless you can find a quote from Starlin confirming it. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Merge
Thanos Rising is just an expanded origin for the character, and most of it's real world info is trivial (such as the detailed description of the teaser). The plot and relevant publication details will end up here anyway, just like all the other details for Thanos' appearances. I really don't think it needs its own page. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

I would second this, publication history can easily go into publication history of Thanos and plot is just expanded origin, most of "important" information was already known from various older issues anyway. BlisterD (talk) 12:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Against: because Thanos is about the character, Thanos Rising is about the 5 issue series, big difference. Lady Lotus (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Looking at the Thanos Rising page, which is unlikely to have much additional information added to it now that it's over and the trade is out, what do you see there that wouldn't be at home on this page? Argento Surfer (talk) 15:36, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Against, in my opinion, the article on the series can be developped with a reception section maybe analysis, comments from authors. Some sources: or  --Crazy runner (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Against, in my opinion, the article on the mini-series, would you merge every superman mini-series, animation and movies into one superman wikipedia page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinbago (talk • contribs) 01:36, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think merging an expanded origin story told in a miniseries into a character page is quite the same as merging every appearance by an international icon like Superman, but I'm removing the tag since consensus is against me. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Patrick Seitz as Thanos?
What source did it say that he will voice Thanos in SMASH? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aslan10000 (talk • contribs) 06:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This was the only thing I could find through Google, but it's speculation, not confirmation. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Mike Friedrich?
Drax the Destroyer, Mentor (A'lars) and Kronos (comics) first appeared in the same issue and are credited as a co-creation with Mike Friedrich, who co-wrote the issue, yet he isn't even mentioned in this article. Granted Starlin had been toying with a Thanos-like characters for years but he was doing the same with Drax the Destroyer, plus we don't know how much of that made it onto the page and how much input Mike Friedrich had - all we can really go by is what is on the page and then fine-tune this with reliable sources discussing the character's creation in "Publication history". Anyway just thought I'd flag it up, as there might be good reasons to exclude Friedrich, but it'd need a good source to say Friedrich did nothing but slap his name on the issue, in which case the other characters that debuted in the same issue will need their creator credits adjusting. Emperor (talk) 16:27, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Per the credits for Iron Man #55, two of Starlin's credits are "story" and "character composition." Friedrich is credited with scripting only. The intro (by Roy Thomas) to the Captain Marvel Masterwork volume with these characters describes them as Starlin's characters. And, in the credits for the Guardians of the Galaxy movie, they're all shown as "created by Jim Starlin". I've never seen any source show Friedrich as a co-creator, or even mention him. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I suppose the issue is how much input someone needs to be listed as a creator as far as Wikipedia is concerned (I suspect some might try and edge Stan Lee out from some of his co-creations, I suppose Silver Surfer is the most obvious) and while I think it is a good case for leaving Friedrich out, we'd really need to source it. I reckon mentioning the different credits in PH and source it too the comic would be a start but I'm sure we can find better, which will flesh out the PH a bit more (here and hopefully on the others).
 * This shows one of his earliest versions and it was in his portfolio when he was hired by Marvel (might be worth putting a thumbnail of that image in the PH?). The LA Times has a good interview with Starlin that mentions that Friedrich dialogued the issue and it also mentions that he had to buy his own ticket.
 * I suppose the friction between Marvel and Starlin is worth a mention too, like the earlier one and this from 2012, although I'm unsure where to put it, as part of it fits in with the film and some with more recent comics.
 * I'll have a bit more of a rummage and see what I can turn up. Emperor (talk) 01:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, there's been a slow motion edit war at Silver Surfer by editors who feel very strongly about Lee's input (both for and against him). Right now, the lead doesn't mention him but the info box does.
 * I'm all for adding Friedrich to the publication history, and I'm sure the content in your links would be good additions as well. Unfortunately, I'm on a filtered internet connection right now and won't be able to edit them into the article myself. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. I can sort that out once I'm happy I've got all the useful sources (and I think a mention if worth dropping into the other articles on characters created in the same issue). I'm pretty happy with leaving Friedrich out of the creator slot (as long as there is no spanner in the works in any future sources) and give a more... nuanced overview in the PH. If I find any other sources I'll drop them in here as I go.
 * Thanks for the pointer to the Silver Surfer (I suppose given your username, you'd have your eye on that!) - I think what is currently there strikes the right balance and the PH captures the tricky background to that one (without having a time machine and taking a peek over their shoulders - which would be one of my the first things I'm going to do once I've tweaked the tachyon seepage). Emperor (talk) 05:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 07:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Infobox image
That infobox image is completely inappropriate: Cluttered, odd angle, and he appears to be holding onto metaphoric objects. It needs to be replaced in order to satisfy infobox standards. This one is simply decorative so it s WP:NONFREE vio as well. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:25, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Any suggestion for a replacement? I'm partial to Lim's version, but I know his design has been updated the last few years. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)


 * The Paco Medina illustration already in the article is much better. A standing image would be even better, but the Medina image does show the character and his costume far more clearly than the existing infobox image, and nothing needs to be uploaded and given a FUR. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)


 * There's also this, which might be the Ron Lim image you mentioned? --Tenebrae (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The Medina image is pretty nice. I'd be find with it. The one you linked is by Starlin. Lim's looks like this. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:22, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, the Lim, definitely. Do we know where it originated and who the inker might be? --Tenebrae (talk) 21:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I thought it was a cropped version of this cover at first, but it's a little different. I'll have to do some research to track it down. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It's been a little over a week, so in the meantime, I'll add the Lim image as per infobox image guidelines disqualifying the present one.--Tenebrae (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Tenebrae, the image currently in the infobox is certainly better than the previous one. However, the character is cut off at the waste and the image it does not shower the character's full costume. I believe this image by Kenneth Rocafort is better suited for the infobox:. What do editors think of this image? DrRC (talk) 18:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * That does show him full figure, though it's a bit cluttered. I think the fact he has a white foot is problematic; it would be fine within the article, I think, but an infobox is supposed to be on-model, for lack of a better phrase. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:58, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

These three show the full costume, Tenebrae - the first is by Simone Bianchi:, the second is by Marko Djurdjevic: , and third (which can be cropped) is by Jerome Opena:. DrRC (talk) 19:09, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I'd be interested in getting others' opinions, obviously, and speaking just for myself, I find both incredibly cluttered and the second one too small; perhaps they can be cropped? (The latter seems as if it might get blurry if blown up, but I guess we could see if cropped versions could be put on this talk page temporarily.) --Tenebrae (talk) 19:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Tenebrae, I think the third image is the best. It captures the character's essence, shows him in full, and is a high quality piece of art. Here it is cropped, and it didn't get blurry: . DrRC (talk) 19:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Two alternative Lim images for consideration: From Thanos Quest #4 (would need a better scan) and a panel from Infinity Gauntlet #5. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Here's one by Alan Davis that could be cropped:. DrRC (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I think the Thanos Quest #4 image is the best of the bunch. The Infinity Gauntlet image has another person holding onto him, and the Alan Davis image has dead-looking bodies in the foreground, which seems as if it would require explanation in the caption, aside from blocking his feet.--Tenebrae (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I think the the Jerome Opena image is the best, since the Lim image looks grainy in my opinion. DrRC (talk) 21:38, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I somehow skipped over the Jerome Opena image. It's not perfect, but it's closer than anything else so far, and it shows him full figure. I can go with that, if other editors agree, though I would really suggest cropping it in order to get as much of the clutter out of the image as we can. That also has the benefit of leaving us with a larger central image.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I cropped it further. Perhaps this is better: . DrRC (talk) 21:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking maybe this.Addendum: pinging since my temporary image upload will be erased by a bot very shortly.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Tenebrae, I cropped the original uploaded file further, with your dimensions. I didn't want to "slim" it out too much, because then it looks blurry when put into the dimensions of the infobox. How is this? DrRC (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Great! Far as I'm concerned, load it on up! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I uploaded it. DrRC (talk) 22:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Thanos. 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/20140603075112/http://multiversitycomics.com/news/thanos-joins-the-new-avengers-in-september-and-time-runs-out-as-hickmans-books-jump-ahead-8-months/ to http://multiversitycomics.com/news/thanos-joins-the-new-avengers-in-september-and-time-runs-out-as-hickmans-books-jump-ahead-8-months/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.slashfilm.com/avengers-3-guardians-connection/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://collider.com/kevin-feige-iron-man-4-guardians-of-the-galaxy/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050213134802/http://www.corvusonline.net/thanos/ to http://www.corvusonline.net/thanos/

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) 19:40, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Move contents of legacy to video games?
Legacy section mentions Thanos appearance in Fornite. Shouldn't this just be another bullet point in the video game appearance section, not legacy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edpark717 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Fortnite does not warrant its own section and I moved it into the Video games section instead. - Richiekim (talk) 03:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

This 1 paragraph
Apart from the first sentence, the following paragraph (currently in the main page at the time of this post) seems to be full of incomplete sentences:
 * Presently locked within a maximum security cosmic Alcatraz, Thanos sits alone within a cell as his sickness ravages his body. All while being mocked by its prison warden whom he lured into a false sense of security in order to escape; ripping off his arm for escape access and murdering half his personal staff in a bid for freedom. Having narrowly escaped his imprisonment before its self-destruction, Thanos retreats to a hidden outpost where a roving mercenary colony loyal only to him was once stationed. Only to find it decimated at the hand of the new lover of Mistress Death; who reveals that she'd stricken her former avatar with his fatal sickness, being his son Thane, now boasting the power of the Phoenix Force. Whom under her coaxing, had banished the mad titan back to the decimated Moon of Titan now entirely stripped of his godlike powers.

Same with this next sentence, so there's probably more grammatical errors in the main page that I'm missing: The Mad Titan jumps into the pinhole of nothingness alongside his brother, whom not trusting his butcherous sibling with the supposed infinite power of said collective; having survived the crushing force of the singularity they dove into, Thanos and Eros are greeted by the Coven at the godly graveyard. I'm posting here because I don't know how to reword it accurately. --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 04:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC) --UltimateKuriboh (talk) 04:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2018
110.138.170.101 (talk) 00:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2019
In the novels section, you should add the 2018 novel Thanos: Titan Consumed which revolves around Thanos. 2604:2D80:C002:830D:8514:6B98:A543:66B8 (talk) 00:49, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

edit request on 17 February 2019
221.197.12.162 (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Who defeated Thanos in the Cosmic Cube arc?
You have the right name of the person, but the wrong link. The link goes to the Carol Danvers Captain Marvel page, but it was Mar-Vell who defeated Thanos during that arc. Here's the excerpt from the Mar-Vell page (Captain_Marvel_(Mar-Vell)):

"Mar-Vell aids the Avengers against the Grim Reaper and the Space Phantom.[24] Mar-Vell allies himself with Mentor and Eros against the death worshipper Thanos and his forces in a war for the Cosmic Cube.[9][25][26][27] Seeing the magnitude of the threat, the cosmic entity Kronos aids them by creating Drax the Destroyer, whose sole purpose is to kill Thanos.[28] Another cosmic being, Eon, transforms Mar-Vell into the "Protector of the Universe". This provides the hero with new abilities, including "cosmic awareness".[29] Thanos gains the Cube and uses it to make himself omnipotent. Thanos' spirit leaves his body, and Mar-Vell uses the opportunity to shatter the Cube, which was still in Thanos' hand. This undoes Thanos's actions.[30][31]"

--Rvnknight (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

name
Is thanos related to Thanatos the greek personification of death? At least the name looks like this - I did not read the comics so cannot know. If so then add this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.249.7.24 (talk) 10:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Gamora
I'd like to know why Gamora is barely mentioned in this article. Gamora is a big part to Thanos' character and I think she should be mentioned more. Penguin7812 (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably because the fictional biography is already 3,100 words, which is insane for what is essentially a plot summary. I don't object to including more about Gamora on principal, but the biography needs to get shorter, not longer. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Powers and Abilities
User 72.192.204.181, you keep adding in that whole "Hulk avoidance" bit as if it was something of real importance. It isn't. It add nothing to the article as a whole since that section already mentions that Thanos prefers to outwit opponents. To that end, I'm removing it yet again. --^o^CORVUS^o^ | Talk, 13 march 2006

Thanos' motivations
Thanos possesses a superhuman intellect that is almost obsessively dedicated to the annihilation of life and the mastery of any technology or mysticism that will enable him to achieve this goal.

Didn't Thanos outgrew those motivations after the Infinity Gauntlet affair? Nowadays, the only things that drive is the pursuit of power, knowledge, and a daunting challenge to prove himself against. Peter David and Jim Starlin even retcon events that showcase nihilistic tendencies from Thanos. - Marikina

>Yup. 'Used to be' works better for me as well.

Thanos sacrificing himself to save the universe
Considering he has spent his life trying to destroy the universe I find it odd that he would give his life to save it. Could someone please explain why he does this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.101.51 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 7 April 2007

Oh why is everyone ignoring me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.241.99 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 12 April 2007


 * simple.


 * If this Universe is destroyed, then Thanos loses THIS version of Death, whom he still obviously loves greatly despite his pretense to the contrary. All that aside, remember that Thanos doesn't go around just killing willy-nilly....unless Mistress Death asks.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanos777 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 12 May 2007

Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2019
Remove "Brolin reprises his role in Avengers: Endgame.[105][106] After the film's climatic battle, Tony Stark successfully summons the Infinity Stones to defeat Thanos - turning him and his army into dust." This is a huge spoiler and should not be included for at least 2 weeks from now (26th April 2019). MrDeftino (talk) 14:05, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done By Kredal – Þjarkur (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Excessive template
There doesn't need to be a character template on this page for every character or group Thanos has ever interacted with. Adding excessive amounts for tangential characters (or characters from another company) won't aid readers. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I totally agree. On top of that, most secondary Navbox subjects are already called out in the primary Navbox for the character.  I noticed this recently by using "What links here" on minor characters.  I thought, "Why would Galactus link to Revanche?"  I tried to clean up a couple articles, but I didn't realize how widespread this issue actually is across multiple characters.  Some were reverted and some were not.  I'm not sure what forum would be appropriate to determine an aggreed-to, cohesive approach to tackling the problem everywhere as opposed to case-by-case, though.  From what I've seen so far, this seems like edit-war fodder if there isn't an agreement/vote somewhere to reference. 2pou (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It started last fall, and it seems to have become a bigger problem in the last two or three months. The general rule of thumb is that a template should be on an article if that article is in the template, but some editors have been using that to game the system - by creating a template for every character, there's no limit to how many they can add to an article. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:24, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2019
the photo that is first shown to the box on the right should be updated Ageryg (talk) 01:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. QueerFilmNerd  talk 22:20, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Last ISBN number is wrong, should be : 978-1302905590, That's the ISBN for Thanos Wins.
Last ISBN number is wrong, should be : 978-1302905590, That's the ISBN for Thanos Wins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1810:1E1D:B600:3498:137C:36DF:4859 (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)


 * ✅ Verified and fixed. Looks like it was a copy/paste error from the previous collection line. -2pou (talk) 17:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Edit Request on 5/23/2019
Thanos appears as a playable character in the video game "Marvel Strike Force"
 * Do you have a link to a reliable article that says this, or something else that can be cited? Argento Surfer (talk) 19:51, 23 May 2019 (

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Strike_Force#Villains, https://strikeforce.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_charactersThunder35okc (talk) 15:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia and fandom wikis are not acceptable to source material in articles. Acceptable sources are described here. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Edit war
Drmies, see these edits: 2601:240:109:614C:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 (talk) 13:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It's an ongoing thing in all these articles. Drmies (talk) 14:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)