Talk:The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume III: Century

Fair use rationale for Image:League3.jpg
Image:League3.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 07:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Promotional Art Question
I noticed on a page about the League that is to appear in Century (see for a good picture) that there is a strange thing on the League's roster. It shows from left to right: Carnacki, Quatermain, Murray, Raffles, Orlando; but who is the woman farthest left? It's obviously not Challenger or Doolittle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.243.176.166 (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that is supposed to be a mystery. My guess however would be someone connected to Nemo, whether it be Jenny Diver or someone else.Spikynorman (talk) 18:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually I now think that Miss Diver may in fact be Nemo's daughter, I had read yesterday that Nemo's daughter's name is Janni and someone had made the connection Pirate Jenny/Janni.168.216.80.213 (talk) 14:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The picture from this interview with alan moore: {http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/2009/talking-to-an-extraordinary-gentleman-of-letters-part-one-padraig-chats-with-alan-moore/) shows that Janni Diver is Nemo's daughter. It isn't mentioned by the author, but this page makes it mostly explicit: (http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/LOEG%20Century%201910%20Janni%20runs%20away.jpg) 128.80.206.153 (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Plot Section
I found this section merely repetitive and messy, the background section say everything that section said. I took it out.

Missing reference/s
''Book Three will open with a scene involving Orlando, now enlisted in the British Army as they're trying to pull out of the Qumar quagmire. Moore has said that this scene will demonstrate "what kind of creature Orlando is after these thousands of years."''

Where are the reference/s for this? I'd badly like to know if this is true.

--218.215.188.159 (talk) 08:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I didn't add that quote in but I recognise it from the Alan Moore interview in Jess Nevins' book "Impossible Territories" 89.101.63.72 (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Could someone please add some references for the above quotation? Thank you. --218.215.164.228 (talk) 13:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Note Question
I know I'll probably have to wait for the book itself to come out, but...lunar amazons? What are they from? The Great Moon Hoax? I am SO curious right now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.229.35 (talk) 22:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of B-movies that have things like races of barbaric women on the moon. Could be one of those. 75.111.221.153 (talk) 13:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Mystery solved: it's from 1961's "Nude on the Moon". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.229.35 (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm pretty sure it's from one of the works of the anthology movie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Women_on_the_Moon It was recently confirmed in an interview with Alan Moore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.217.232.167 (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Place?
"This issue also includes a previously untold segment of The Story of O and the fact that in 1964 Mina Harker was part of an English superhero team.[7]"

I moved that to the "Paint it Black" section because it seems more logical that these segments will appear there, and not in "What keeps mankind alive" - publishing dates of Story of O and the whole 1964 dating thing, plus, Moore is talking about them being here in the text.

Somebody undid the change though. I just thought I would note this, and justify it... so... yeah.

(I won't get into the pendatic bit about her being "Mina Murray" ;) ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.5.214 (talk) 23:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I think if we read the quote again in context;
 * We explain the gravity problem, we’ve worked in the black monolith from “2001,” we worked in The Clangers and the Soup Dragon. :We worked them into a semi-coherent-sounding ecosystem as well. We’ve explained how the insect creatures came to be on the moon :and how the humanoids came to be on the moon as well, how it is possible to go through airless space in a geese-pulled chariot. :That was a toughie, I got to say. I think that we’ve just about covered it comprehensively.
 * I’ve only done the first episode of this, but in that alone it’s kind of berserk. As part of this story, there’s a previously :untold chapter or segment from “The Story Of O,” which we work ingeniously into The League mythology. There’s a superhero sequence :where we make a brief allusion to the fact that in 1964, in the previous year, Mina Harker was somewhat involved in what seemed to :be an English superhero team. This is setting up some tantalizing, we hope, hints for some future volumes. Yeah, and Kevin’s done :marvelous illustrations to this, so as well as the lead story, we’ve had the opportunity to make good use of the back-up pages. I :think the readers are going to be pleased with that.
 * so it looks like it is going to be in the section in the back called Minions on the Moon, set in the 1960s.
 * so my take on it is;
 * {| class="wikitable"
 * so it looks like it is going to be in the section in the back called Minions on the Moon, set in the 1960s.
 * so my take on it is;
 * {| class="wikitable"
 * {| class="wikitable"
 * {| class="wikitable"

! style="background-color:gold;"| PART ! style="background-color:gold;"| MAIN STORY ! style="background-color:gold;"| MINIONS ON THE MOON
 * I
 * 1910
 * 1960s
 * II
 * 1968
 * 1960s
 * III
 * 2008
 * 1960s
 * }
 * but I could be totally worng, we'll see in a few days, Damiantgordon (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 1960s
 * }
 * but I could be totally worng, we'll see in a few days, Damiantgordon (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * but I could be totally worng, we'll see in a few days, Damiantgordon (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean. The timeframe for minions on the moon seems to be 1965 then, with the second chapter of Century being 1968. :| *must read closer*

(Although I must say, the idea of an "unseen chapter in the Story of O" tying in with the story on the Moon to be intriguing. I wonder who "O" will turn out to have *really* been, eh? ;) ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.47.228 (talk) 13:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I suspect she may tie in with the whole M thing where "everyone has an initial" as mentioned in Black Dossier, or, due to previous comments Moore made about Thomas Pynchon's "V" she may tie into that. 76.113.229.35 (talk) 20:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

... I was thinking of the more obvious - an alias for an oversexed, libertine who is occasionally a woman. :| Anyho, I think wikipedia has rules about rampant speculation... *whistles nonchanantly* —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.6.209 (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies. But I see what you mean. 76.113.229.35 (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, it seems reasonably likely now that the dates are going to be 1969 and 2009/2010; not '68 and '08. The most recent has merely been updated to the new present (who sees it becoming 2011 before publication..?!), while the interviews seem to drift between 1968 and 1969 with casual abandon, before (maybe) settling on the latter.
 * One of the interviews (incorporated) also suggested that the backup story was being written as if in 1969, although set four years earlier. ntnon (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * who sees it becoming 2011 before publication..?!"

We should be so lucky. ;)

(Actually, to me, this seems more exciting, as the lack of a required period marker suggests it shows clearly that they aren't working with an "adaptation" of a period piece - such as the Martian Invasion, or the Threepenny Opera - and instead are presenting original storylines against the period.)
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.22.230 (talk) 01:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it's the lightly- to heavily-fictionalised "present" anyway, so although I broadly agree that it will be refreshing to see a new take, it probably won't be too much different. Roll on Future League, too! ntnon (talk) 18:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Link to Jess Nevins Annotations
I undid the removal of the link to Jess Nevins annotations, because whether or not the comic has yet been released, the link is a relevant one. 89.101.63.72 (talk) 17:53, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Release Dates
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21322

Is in an interview with Top Shelf publisher Chris Staros, gives some information along with the planned release dates of May 2010 for part 2 and May 2011 for part 3. I'm not sure it should be added to the article, but if you think so can someone do it.

Currently the article lists part 3 as 2010 anyway, which needs to updated because its citation even says 2011.24.190.34.219 (talk) 03:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * DoneFlygongengar (talk) 16:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Out of date tag?
There was an out of date tag added to this article without any explaination. Just so that the user who did this can understand the situation "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume III: Century" is a three part comic -- part one has come out already, but the next two parts have yet to be released, so how or why is this article out of date ???

All this info is in the article. Damiantgordon (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Minions of the Moon
Back up story's like Allan and the Sundered Veil and The New Traveller's Almanac are stand alone Aricle, so why not minions of the moon?--209.91.107.129 (talk) 17:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume III: Century. 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/20120127024750/http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/07/29/league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-century-1969-the-story-is/ to http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/07/29/league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-century-1969-the-story-is/

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) 21:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume III: Century. 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/20071203191334/http://dcboards.warnerbros.com/web/forum.jspa?forumID=29209150 to http://dcboards.warnerbros.com/web/forum.jspa?forumID=29209150

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) 11:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)