Talk:Wolverine in other media

Fair use rationale for Image:Wolverine3.jpg
Image:Wolverine3.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 (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Wolverinevo.PNG
The image Image:Wolverinevo.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --06:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I like Logan, but I hope, they make a movie without him, so other charakter can develop. --Fried-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.183.170 (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project
As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit WikiProject_Comics/Assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Image issues
The fair use of image:Taslogan.jpg in this article is questionable. Listed below is/are the reason(s) for this:

If the above concern(s) can be addressed in light of the relevant policies and/or guidelines, the image use can be retained. If not, the image needs to be removed from the article.

The fair use of image:Evologan.jpg in this article is questionable. Listed below is/are the reason(s) for this:

If the above concern(s) can be addressed in light of the relevant policies and/or guidelines, the image use can be retained. If not, the image needs to be removed from the article.

The fair use of image:Watxlogan.jpg in this article is questionable. Listed below is/are the reason(s) for this:

If the above concern(s) can be addressed in light of the relevant policies and/or guidelines, the image use can be retained. If not, the image needs to be removed from the article.

Collected together, these 3 are effectively an image gallery. There's also the nagging problem that there is very, very little difference in how the character is depicted without the costume.

I'm not convinced there's even enough reason for one of these, let alone all 3.

And please note, the 1996 image is up for deletion here.

- J Greb (talk) 01:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * And Taslogan.jpg has been deleted. - J Greb (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


 * And the last two pulled... To be brutally honest, having a costume/cowl-less image for each show isn't going to fly. A great effort was made to keep the character's "civilian" look consistent. One image, and the film is the most compelling since it's also "this actor played..." is sufficient.
 * Now if we were to get into the costume variants...
 * - J Greb (talk) 23:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. Given that the related move discussion resulted in Wolverine (character) remaining where it is, the fact that I did not specify a move target has seemingly clouded this discussion. I'm going to withdraw this discussion, and start a new one below. Steel1943 (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Wolverine in other media → ? – The current title is incredibly ambiguous, especially given the fact that the current primary topic for the term "wolverine" is the animal, not the comic book character. However, I'm not sure what to rename the page ... but it would have to be something less ambiguous than the current one. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 11:57, 25 August 2014 (UTC) Steel1943  (talk) 14:56, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - I agree that some disambiguation is needed, but it will depend on the result of this discussion as to what that should be. Given the current naming conventions, I would suggest renaming it to Wolverine (comics) in other media, similar to Hulk (comics) in other media. Fortdj33 (talk) 19:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose move - current title is unambiguous. Red Slash 03:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Rename the current title does not match the main article Wolverine (comics) and not Wolverine, nor does it indicate what "other media" means, since there's no indication of what the primary media are. Wolverine (comics) in other media therefore fulfills the mission of indicating what this is "other" to, and identifying the topic's subject. As this is a descrptive title and not a prescribed title, it must detail the topic sufficiently to identify its scope, which it does not currently do. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Wolverine (comics) is likely going to be redirected to Wolverine (disambiguation). Unreal7 (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move, version 2

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Page not moved: no consensus Ground Zero | t 01:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Wolverine in other media → Wolverine (character) in other media – The current title is ambiguous, especially given the fact that the current primary topic for the term "wolverine" is the animal, not the character from the comic book series. Since the related move discussion resulted in the character's article remaining with the title Wolverine (character), this article's title should match to avoid confusion for readers finding this article, and then thinking that it is about a subject listed on Wolverine (disambiguation) other than the character. (Please refer to the previous move discussion on this talk page for more information.) Steel1943  (talk) 18:37, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * ''(Pinging editors who participated in previous discussion)  Steel1943  (talk) 18:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ever-so weakly oppose. Re the disambiguation I think a relevant question is, would  Jeff Hardy (professional wrestler) or Hugo Viana (fighter) be likely to get into "other media"?  And what about this little fella.  Until the game sonic the wolverine comes out I don't think other media greatly applies to non-mutants without adamantium skeletons.  Gregkaye (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Use Wolverine (Marvel Comics) in other media or Wolverine (comics) in other media as "other media" is not clearly indicated in the current name, nor the proposed name. The current title fails WP:CRITERIA in that it does not clearly specify the scope. The proposed title doesn't either. If you only watched movies, you'd think it meant in media that is not movies. If you're only familiar with the TV cartoons, then it would mean outside of television. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 06:46, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose - who in their right mind is going to think that this is about an actual wolverine is going to be in "other media" ? Unreal7 (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Aside from the excellent point made by Unreal7, the proposed format is Wikipediaese that non-editors may have difficulty with. La crème de la crème (talk) 10:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose as unnecessary disambiguation. Topics that can be discerned from their context need not have disambiguators. For comparison, we have Madonna (entertainer), but Madonna bibliography; Usher (entertainer), but Usher discography; Brandy Norwood, but Brandy discography; and Georgia (U.S. state), but Georgia in the American Revolution. bd2412  T 16:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose move, per the excellent examples provided by BD2412. This is a sound policy to keep titles reasonable.   - WPGA2345 -     ☛   06:57, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Possible new Live-Action version of Wolverine
According to  Deadline  (link) and  Vanity Fair  (link) actor Taaron Edgerton has been talking with Marvel executives about filling in the role of Hugh Jackman as a new variant of Wolverine. Should that be noted? 0Detail-Attention215 (talk) 21:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)