Talk:X-23

Untitled
As far as I know, X-23's skeleton was not laced with adamantium (because her bones are presumably still growing). I "silently" made this edit recently, and would like the "Notable powers" portion of the entry to be accurate.--Galliaz 22:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Made this minor change to the entry: deleted "skeleton &" from the "Adamantium laced skeleton & claws" phrase.--Galliaz 16:25, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Redeemer
Huh. I always thought she was based on the girl from Elektra and Wolverine: The Redeemer. Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 02:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I edited your post, CyberSkull: it's Elektra and Wolverine; not Wolverine & Elektra. --Kozmik_Pariah —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kozmik Pariah (talk • contribs) 10:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Claws Quote

 * We need to provide a citation to this direct quotation: does anyone know where it appeared?
 * The quote is too long and needs to be edited down.--Galliaz 15:05, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Claws

 * "However a promo art picture for Exiles issue 86, showing several Wolverines from other dimensions, presented also a few female Wolverines in the crowd who all sported triple claws at the hands, while one of the male ones had two on the hands."

That part in the Claws section doesn't make sense. If they are from other dimensions, they're going to be different, so it makes sense for a female to have three claws like Wolverine, and a male to have two claws like X-23.--Vynn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.128.103 (talk) 23:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Do her foot claws retract into her calves, or into her feet? If the latter, I suspect that would interfere with her feet flexing properly when walking. If the former, she'd have to point her toes and feet to extend or retract her claws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mightyfastpig (talk • contribs) 18:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I was just thinking the same thing. Considering she's supposed to be a -clone- it's pretty odd that her claws would end up not-exactly-the-same as her genetic identical twin (minus a very small chromosome).. I think X-men Evolution was not very intelligently written (I remember a promo referring to Wolverine's claws as 'surgical steel') and so anything based on it is allowed to kinda not make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 04:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know how the claws from her foots retract, but I have an explanation why two are in her feets. The article said Rice extracted the claws, and re-inserted them. He could have moved a two of them, too.
 * An alternative idea would be that Wolverine has recessive genes for claws in his feet which are suppressed by his Y-chromosome, or that it's an 	X-linked mutation in this dimension. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.60.232.180 (talk) 09:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the gene for their claws is clearly sex-linked.--Galliaz 13:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The article used to say that Wolverine was not a "human" mutant, but a new species with retractile claws for hunting. The males had three claws on their hands, while the females only have two on their hands and one on their feet, making the claws sex-linked.  I'm guessing that was 99.9% original research because it's no longer part of the article. 75.157.115.154 (talk) 04:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Condense
Is there any hope of condensing the information on this page? Her comic biography is way too long. Kusonaga 13:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to attempt to condense the information in the Innocence Lost and Mercury Falling sections. --156.34.71.188 00:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

X-23 in MC2?
If X-23 were to appear in the MC2 continuity,would she be Rina (Wild Thing) Logan's half sister?(Rina has a half brother,Sabreclaw) - R.G. 05:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope, she would be Rina's Pseudo-Aunt, being a clone of her daddy and all. WookMuff 22:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Toxic Adamantium
If adamantium is truly indestructible, it would have to be chemically non-reactive, and therefore non-toxic. It also shouldn't leave "traces" of any kind. This is basic logic. Chaotic nipple 00:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You win a No-Prize! Morwen - Talk 15:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wolverine has both true adamantium and adamantium beta in his body, both are referred to as adamantium, true adamantium could cause adamantium poisoning as a catalyst, and adamantium beta could cause adamantium poisoning as a catalyst and/or a reactant. If adamantium beta is the sole cause of adamantium poisoning, this would explain why characters without healing factor are unaffected by adamantium poisoning. -- Gordon Ecker 08:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Costume
I read on some ebay listing or something that X-23's first costume, or at least the one on the cover of UX451 was an old wolverine costume, but the only time i have previously seen that costume was on Lynx, a feral character who wolverine and nick fury met in Marvel Comics Presents 123-130. Anyone know anything more about that that can be added? WookMuff 22:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Self Harm
It says in the artice that her scars from her self harm don't seem to heal up, but so far we've seen nothing in the art that puts it down in solid. It could be that the 'X's we see on her arm following her cutting herself were simply in the process of being mended... it is more likely to be artistic license must be taken to give that aspect of her character some impact. -Rexregum —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.186.8.11 (talk) 20:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
 * I agree and have removed that part.Lipperman 03:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Geech Link
This link doesnt go to a comic character named "Geech" Could somebody add an entry for him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.195.65.102 (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Character History
The end of the Comics section goes in to way too much detail for each issue (of the type: "and then the character leaves the school and gets some coffee with a friend"; as the charcter develops this will become much too unwieldy. Now is the time to condense this section to only the most pertinent details.

Also the tenses shift throughout the later paragraphs. Can we stick to one tense? Past tense? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.21.184.95 (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:TENSE explains that the simplest and clearest way to do this is using present continuous tense.
 * WP:RELTIME be careful to silly mistakes like "now" or "currently" or "recently" which quickly and inevitably become wrong.
 * Future tense should generally be avoided or carefully tagged, to indicate when it needs to be updated. -- 109.79.98.29 (talk) 19:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

X-Men Movie
Was that her fighting Wolverine (in whichever movie it was, I or II)? --Johnny (Cuervo) 20:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * X-23 does not appear in any of the three X-Men movies. The woman with the metallic claws is a mutant version of Lady Deathstrike. Dragei 22:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistencies
Earlier I added a small bit of information to the Inconsistencies section which was deleted as speculation. And that's true, it was somewhat speculative. However, so are various other comments such as: "(It's clear that these storytelling liberties were taken in order to establish X-23 as an addition to the New X-Men cast for new readers.)". That in itself is speculation unless it's ever been expressly stated in an interview.

In fact, my addition was far less speculative. It was based on existing scenes from certain issues, that establish Laura's seclusive nature. In Uncanny X-Men she spent the majority of her time stalking and watching Logan from a distance. Then in Marvel Team-Up we see her sitting alone watching him sleep through some security monitors. In addition to that her seclusive nature has also been shown in the fact that prior to being made a part of the New X-Men team, she went on most adventures alone.

But I digress... while noticing this it dawned on me that the entire section has become somewhat moot. It's dedicated to inconsistencies in continuity that no longer exist due to retconning. I move for deletion of that part of the article, as it now serves virtually no purpose. No other article would focus on prior inconsistencies such as these. You may argue that the section is historically significant to the source material, but ultimately, it's not. If we were to document every single retconned continuity issue in comics... well, there wouldn't be enough space on the internet for such a thing. --156.34.67.34 19:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree.--Galliaz 20:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

In accordance I removed the section. However, the Target X section will require updating in order to reflect the story developments/retconning that made removal of the Inconsistencies section possible. Oh, and on a different topic, someone should add information on X-23's appearances in the "X-Men: The End" books to the Alternate versions category. --156.34.67.34 22:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I added X-Men: The End, but I'm still doing work on it, so I'll continue to tweak it. And I'm also trying to track down an image of X-23 from said books. Also, my mistake on the quotations bit, I wasn't aware of that distinction. --156.34.67.34 11:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. I hope you don't mind that I went ahead and tweaked the X-M: The End info you added.--Galliaz 14:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I don't mind at all, in fact, you saved me the effort. I was going to trim it down a bit after I looked through some X-Men: The End issues, so thank you. In addition to that I wasn't sure if I should add the note which you removed to begin with, as it was relatively unimportant. Now, as it stands, I seem to remember something about X-23 being sent to track down Sage in the book(s), but as I mentioned before, I'm looking through some of the material to confirm. --156.34.67.34 12:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's that. I've updated the information for The End. Now only a handful of problems remain... The Target X section needs updating in a big way, it's a couple of issues behind. And the Mercury Falling section could use a trim, as we don't need a play by play of every scene, after all. --156.34.67.34 16:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Overly long
This article is way long for a character who's only been around for four years. It seems good, but maybe you could condense the plot section down a bit? :) Paul730 20:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, don't worry, I'm working on how to do that at the moment. It's as simple as re-wording some areas, and cutting out others, but that's more work than you'd expect. It all comes down to deciding which bits of information are important, and which are just bloating the article. An example of the best this article has to offer is the "Uncanny X-Men" section, in which 4 stories-worth (IE 11 issues-worth) of content is condensed into 4 small paragraphs. --156.34.95.142 03:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I've done a great deal of trimming, shifting, and minor edits as well. I'm still not entirely happy with the Mercury Falling section, but it's better. I more-or-less just edited out the fat, leaving only the bare bones. I didn't do a lot of re-wording to that section as I'm quite tired at the moment. The problem with that section is that because it's so X-23 centric, a great deal of it is important. Later on I'll be working on the Innocence Lost section, but again, like Mercury Falling, that's going to be tough due to a great deal of important information being included. --156.34.92.174 17:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice work!--Galliaz 18:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that much of the information is important to the character, but the article still seems a little long. Compare it to someone like Wolverine's, who's been around much longer than X-23.  The UXM section looks good, but the Innocence Lost part looks very long.  While in-depth plot summaries may seem important to fans, they can be a little overwhelming and confusing to people unfamilar with the character.  Like you said, try to stick to the bare bones instead of getting swamped with details.  Right now, I'm trying to condense the character histories of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters, and I understand how hard it is to shorten things down to a reasonable length. I feel your pain! ;) Paul730 00:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Ha, well, I'll begin work on the Innocence Lost section tomorrow/later today (as it's 1AM), and I also have some additional plans for the article that should reduce length and give the whole thing a better flow. --156.34.83.183 04:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Done, I overhauled the Innocence Lost section per what I said before. I may do more work on it later however. Now I'm going to make those additional changes I mentioned before. As I had to cut a substantial amount of useful information regarding her personality, relationships, training, etc, I'm going to add a new section.
 * The new section will be called "Attributes", and will replace the current Powers and abilities section. It will also have a number of subsections, "Powers and abilities", which will deal with her powers/abilities and training, "Personality", and finally, the new addition, "Relationships" which will go into limited detail about her evolving interaction with other characters. --156.34.73.190 16:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Annnnnnnnnnnnd done. I'm sure I'll continue to make little changes here and there, but as of now everything is looking good. The new section even allowed me to cut out additional useless bits from the biography. --156.34.73.190 18:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well done. The article looks much better. Paul730 00:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, although admittedly, I didn't put as much effort into the Attributes section as I could have. It's pretty good, but I'm sure it could be better, I was multitasking when I slapped it together. Now all that really needs to be done is some updating to the Target X section, and I haven't yet decided if I'll do that or not. --156.34.80.96 03:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic work Galliaz, you've made some great changes that really help streamline the article. I did however re-add one bit of useful information, the fact that X-23 mysteriously leaves the X-Mansion off-panel between Uncanny and New X-Men. I believe it's just something that should be kept as it's not explained why she left in the actual source material, nor is it explained in the article. Which in turn adds a certain level of disconnect. I imagine as someone not familiar with the character they would see that X-23 "returns" post-Decimation, and wonder where exactly she's returning from. --156.34.87.107 00:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This makes perfect sense. (And thanks!)--Galliaz 01:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, the article finally feels somewhat complete! It's definitely much more natural, it has a nice flow, and it reads well; giving you the whole picture yet only including the bare bones of the information. I did some additional editing, and yes, I think this is shaping up to be a fine article indeed. --156.34.86.50 13:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's much clearer. However, I'd like to point out that Kimura seems to come out of nowhere in the article. It's like, blah blah blah, X-23 is tracked down by Kimura, blah blah blah. What? Perhaps an earlier explanation about Kimura would be of benefit. If at all possible, perhaps instead of doing a publication separated history of X-23, we could combine the series that outline X-23's early life and then move on from there. This is because the two series that outline X-23's early history really overlap to such an extent (with flashbacks) that separating them really makes the beginning of the article really choppy. Yes, it's clear, but it read like a computer wrote these entries. This again comes back to the Kimura example. Yes, Kimura only appears in the X-23: Target X series for the first time, but she was there during the X-23: Innocence Lost and not to discuss that in X-23's origins and then to have Kimura magically appear in X-23: Target X (especially since the two series were written by the same people) gives causal readers a "what?" moment. So perhaps we can combine X-23's early history/origin story before her appearance in NYX so that it reads more easily and not so choppy. Remember, we're not Tarzan. RossF18 02:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)]]
 * I added phrasing to explain who Kimura is. It's been a while since I read Innocence Lost, but I actually don't remember Kimura appearing there.  She may very well have been created in Target X.  On your main point, Ross, I think the entry should delineate what occurred by each series/title: this helps the reader get the sense for when certain plot and character elements were added, and by what particular team of creators.--Galliaz 13:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right and I do not mean to suggest that the entire article be merged into one narative. I was just suggesting that the Origins part of the X-23 story be created that includes both Innocence Lost and Target X. Both of these were created by the same writers (Craig Kyle and Chris Yost) who also created X-23 in the first place so having their stories which basically outline X-23's origins do make sense. As I also point out in my post, no Kimura was not in Innocence Lost but Craig Kyle and Chris Yost, again writers of both series, wrote her in as being there out of frame in Innocence Lost because in Target X we see Kimura in X-23's flashbacks to her time in the Facility -- the time outlined in Innocence Lost. Also, thank you for adding that Kimura language to Target X part but while it now better explains who Kimura is, Kimura still appears out of nowhere in Target X. Yes, you would also be right to point out that this actually the way Kimura is introduced by Kyle and Yost in Target X -- out of nowhere. But for clarity's sake, I still propose that merge just the first two stories (again, I never suggested merging the entire publication history part of the article). This would also help alleviate some length issues since while we're OK at this point, thinking of future story lines, it's better to start being brief now instead of deciding what to cut when X-23 goes on to participate in hundreds of story lines. (RossF18 20:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC))

Well, make it brief, since Kimura has an article of her own. Also, it's rather simple how we can do this without merging the Innocence Lost and Target X sections: simply start the Target X synopsis the way it's presented in the book. Meaning start it out with something along the lines of; "the story begins with X-23 telling Matt Murdock and Captain America about her past". And then present the rest as a flashback narrative, the way the source material does. "She then tells them how Kimura was involved in her training", etc.

It would be easier to do it that way, definitely. That way we don't confuse people as to what event takes place in what book, as Kimura was retroactively added to X's history in Target X. Oh, and P.S., I was tired so I only skimmed the above post, so if that idea was presented before, sorry. Heh. --156.34.83.102 04:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure if putting the entire letter from her mother is needed. It is very long and it is weird to look at as in most of the letter every word is capitalized. Maybe just discuss and summerize what the letter said? 67.142.235.68 (talk) 00:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Main image
I'm a bit conflicted as to what should be the article's main image. There are essentially two options: or On the one hand the first image is a more accurate representation of the characters core costume, whereas the second image is a highly stylized variant. But on the other hand, the second image is a better representation of her current costume as portrayed by the current New X-Men artist, Skottie Young. I'm honestly happy either way, but it has to be one or the other, as all other X-23 images aren't proper representations of her core outfit (I searched through just about all of them last night). --156.34.81.21 20:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Random question, but is it pronounced "Ex Two Three" or "Ex Twenty Three". My friends and I always call her Ex Two Three, but I just watched her Evolution episode and they say Twenty Three. Mind you, I also say "Nahmor" instead of "Naymor" and "Shier" instead of "Shee Ar", and they're both wrong. Oh well... Paul730 03:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's Ex Twenty-Three. And while this isn't really the place, I believe both Naymor, and Nahmor are acceptable, I personally use a combination of the two: "Nahymor". Almost a silent nay, but not quite. --156.34.83.102 04:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

X-23 images...
What on earth? Why is it that both of the main X-23 images used in this article were deleted? Both the Skottie Young one, and the one we used prior to that of her in her original New X-Men costume. I had no idea either of those images was on the chopping block, but regardless, we need to get the Skottie Young one back. Chances are it was only deleted because someone didn't give the proper information required by Wikipedia when they uploaded it. --156.34.84.5 23:23, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Galliaz, we need a different picture than what's up currently, it's not in the least an accurate representation of the character. Not only is that not X-23's usual uniform, or even a variation thereof, but it's also an image of her as a little girl. --156.34.64.55 06:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think, given the circumstances, that this image is acceptable. The image is the cover to the first issue of the character's most recent mini-series, and is therefore an acceptable fair use image, (avoiding the problem encountered with the Scottie Young image that was deleted).  Regarding her age, her depiction in the image makes her look like a teenage girl, which is the character's present age in the Marvel universe.--Galliaz 13:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to disagree with you on this one, if only because in that image she'd pictured as being 11 or 12. Whereas now she's 17. And if my suspicions are correct, those two images I mentioned above were only deleted because someone didn't give a proper fair-use rationale. --156.34.73.185 03:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's standard practice to use a cover image from the character's most recent series as a main entry image. And though I disagree about how old she looks, I think it's a waste of time to argue about how young/old a character has been drawn to look on a comic book cover.--Galliaz 03:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

True, true. However, while it may be standard practice to use a recent cover, it's also standard practice to use a more recent portrayal. In that regard it's not about how old she looks, it's about how old she is on that cover. Take the Bucky Barnes article for example, the main image used isn't of him as a child. It's of him as the Winter Soldier, while the young Bucky is seen lower on the article. That would be like, for example, using a picture of a young James Howlett from the ORIGIN limited series (which details his past) for the main image on the Wolverine article.

I'm arguing against this image for many reasons: it's not her standard uniform, it's an image of her as a child, it's not even of her present look, and because of all of those, it's not high-profile enough a look for the character to keep as the article's main image. --156.34.73.185 05:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio
Why is the whole text of that letter in the article? Surely that's copyright violation. 77.127.0.121 (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2008 (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 14:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Comic bio
Why does the comic bio take precedence over X-Men Evolution? Like Quinn, she started in the show and that should be her primary bio. Emperor001 (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no "primary bio" in the Harley Quinn article. The comic and animated series versions are both represented because the character was significant in both comics and multiple Batman animated series. X-23 appeared in two episodes of X-Men: Evolution. Her exploits in these two appearances can easily be summed up in the Other Media section.Odin&#39;s Beard (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Three episodes counting the Xaviers vision of the future. Emperor001 (talk) 01:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Not Clone, Genetic Twin.
Citation for this fact is in her first self titled mini-series. Innocence lost issue 1 page 16, and continues throughout that issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.88.194.28 (talk) 05:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, she was created by extracting Wolverine's DNA, replacing the damaged Y chomosome with an X chromosome, and then inserting the modified DNA into an egg. That is the process called "cloning".  Coincidentally, cloning also produces a genetic twin of the organism that was  cloned.  Therefore, she is both a clone and a genetic twin. She's refered to as his clone in most other subsequent media featuring her, anyways.  207.216.208.68 (talk) 05:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I could see this being called partial cloning, but if some of the DNA is replaced with OTHER dna, I wouldn't call it a full clone. Ranze (talk) 10:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The procedure dictated in her origin book is that they duplicated Wolverine's X chromosome. There's no canon source to support the assertions I've seen pop up that Laura received DNA from other sources (aside from Sarah Kinney's mDNA) If you want to be really accurate, it makes her the Parthenogenesis parthenogenetic offspring of Logan's mother carried by a surrogate womb, unfortunately that would probably fall under OR since it's never actually discussed in the books.Ambaryer (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

"Laura is depicted as an 11-year-old girl who was created from Logan's DNA, thus making her Logan's biological daughter." - I know that is what film actually states, but that makes no sense. You can call her a clone or anything, but how partial cloning makes her Logan's "biological daughter" is beyond me. Previous movie clearly shows Logan's blood was taken, so she is a clone of some kind, I hope everyone knows what must be used to create real biological children :)178.236.241.29 (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The implication I got was that genetic engineering has reached the point that gametes can be reconstructed directly from a DNA sample, rather than requiring harvested eggs or sperm. The X23 children were therefore the result of very advanced artificial insemination techniques. Thus why Laura is mixed race in the film universe. -- Ambaryer (talk) 11:37, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Venom Crossover
X-23 will be teamed with Venom, Red Hulk, and the female Ghost Rider in the upcoming chapters of the Venom miniseries, starting in February. Source: http://lytherus.com/2011/10/20/marvel-announces-february-event-the-venom-event/ 173.180.77.156 (talk) 11:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Females with healing factor
Not an issue that came up with Wolverine (though I imagine it could with one issue that was probably not addressed, related to Judaism birth rituals) but being that X-23 is female, it makes me wonder if the comics have addressed the issue of the hymen.

For people with normal healing abilities it gradually breaks down, tears, etc. But what happens if you have a healing factor that would repair all that?

The same issue could potentially apply to Shulkie. Ranze (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Far as I know this has not come up in the comics or is it likely to. Sounds like a question a character from the film Mallrats would ask. -- 109.79.98.29 (talk) 19:08, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not a doctor, but I decided to research this. Apparently most female new borns have hymen that already have an orifice. Here is a summary of the article's findings. This allows for the excretion of menstrual fluids and other discharge . Therefor, X-23 would most likely have been born with an already partially perforated hymen. She may or may not however feel discomfort using tampons or during sexual intercourse, but even that may not apply depending on the shape of her hymen upon birth. Portablejukebox (talk) 01:36, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * A sort-of-related consideration is: How would her healing factor affect her ability to get pregnant? We know that Logan has no problem siring offspring (in fact it wouldn't surprise me if it actually ENHANCES his little swimmers), but what about Laura? The female immune system sometimes attacks the sperm cells, so would it render her sterile because her heightened immune system would prevent conception? Or would it aggressively ENHANCE her fertility, both by ensuring the healthy development of her offspring and, since a normal female only produces so many egg cells in her lifetime, would her healing factor allow her to create more thus prolonging the time period in which she is fertile? Would birth control even work with her? And as Raj says, I think we're out of things to talk about. Ambaryer (talk) 11:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 1 one external link on X-23. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs for additional information. I made the following changes: When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/DisneyandMarvel/news/?a=12993

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:29, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Rename
Given the fact that a large part of the current "All-New Wolverine" series is for Laura Kinney trying NOT to be the mindless assassin X-23, to be just Laura Kinney / Wolverine. I therefore put forward that this page be renamed simply Laura Kinney with a mention of the fact she was originally known as "X-23" in the opening paragraph. I'm also changing the photo to be more in tune with the character, if nobody minds? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nurseline247 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Where was she born / created
Since she speaks spanish with mexican accent is she from Juarez since some of the movie Logan takes place in the outskirts of Juarez mexico — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.240.178.46 (talk) 05:41, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * In the movies, Gabriela's video establishes that Laura and the other children were born at Transigen's Mexico City research facility. It's unclear where her comics incarnation was born, as the location of the Facility was never identified in the books (circumstantial evidence suggests it's somewhere in the US, but not enough to confirm without OR). -- Ambaryer (talk) 11:30, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 18 January 2018

 * The following is a closed 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: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 16:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

X-23 → Laura Kinney – She has also used the name "Wolverine" in the All-New Wolverine comic. See Naming conventions (comics). Cambalachero (talk) 14:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The WP:COMMONNAME of the character still appears to be X-23 despite not being used in the 2017 film. An unscientific google search returns 41,400,000 hits for "X-23" versus 435,000 hits for "Laura Kinney". Even reliable third party sources for the film refer to her as X-23.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment some of those "X-23" hits are probably not for the character, '"x-23" comics' gives 622 000 hits, '"x-23" comic' 834 000, '"x-23" marvel' gives 582 000 hits, which is still more than for "Laura Kinney", but still not that big of a difference. The search '"wolverine" laura' gives about 714 000 while '"logan" laura' gives 1 770 000.★Trekker (talk) 15:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ...'Logan X-23' gives 3,030,000 and 'wolverine x-23' gives 1,190,000 but like I said its unscientific. I'm just using this as anecdotal evidence.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:33, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I used the specific quotation form of searching but whatever, point is that I don't think moving the article is the right thing to do either. My point was just that the difference isn't that big. The character has been X-23 for much longer and will probably return to be called that after her Wolverine run is over.★Trekker (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Per common name. It's too soon to know if this is a lasting or significant change. This reminds me of when Doctor Octopus was briefly moved to Spider-Man. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That really happened????★Trekker (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I recall it being proposed, but looking back I can only see where it was moved to Otto Octavius. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:22, 19 January 2018 (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.

ㅍㄱㅈㅅㅎ
ㅅㅈㅍㅈㄱㅅㅎㅈㅅㄱㅎㄴㅅㄱㄴㅅㄱ 900silver (talk) 23:40, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Page Move?
Why was this page moved? Per the above discussion, the consensus was NOT to move the page. — Ambaryer (talk) 11:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Because the user who moved it didn't see/care about that. Best thing is to contact an admin and ask them to move it back.★Trekker (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I did not see that discussion, however, seeing as the above discussion was two Opposes, one Support (from the proposer in question), and one Comment, it never should have been closed in the first place until there had been a sufficient majority rather than literally 2 to 1, and hence believe a new discussion on whether to retain the move should be had. MacCready (talk) 14:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it was a pretty clear case of pointless discussion. This page should be moved back.★Trekker (talk) 14:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Even the "(comics)" DAB is unneeded, we do not have any article abour a real person named Laura Kinney. Cambalachero (talk) 14:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The (comics) DAB has also been abandonded in favour of (character) per a very extensive discussion from the Wikipedia Comic Project. Truth is that even tho I hate the name "X-23" it is nontheless what the character is best known as.★Trekker (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. If MacCready wants to move it back, I suggest he/she discuss it first.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Again if you want to move the page, then you need to discuss it first.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Name, Main Image and Subsection
Why is this article still called X-23 and why does it use an image of her as X-23 and not Wolverine? That is her codename Wolverine, she is Wolverine, also it's extremely behind as it doesn't have a Subsection about her clone Talon who is not Wolverine and her relationship with Synch Cordelia Van Allen (talk) 23:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Because she's almost universally known outside her fanbase as X-23. When people say "Wolverine" they immediately think of Logan, not Laura. Just like Sam Wilson is still referred to as (comics) even when he's spent time as Captain America. X-23 is how she's best known, and it prevents confusion with Logan. And Laura has already reverted to using another code name after being Wolverine once already, so it's highly likely she'll eventually stop using Wolverine again in the future. If there would be any change to the page name, it ought to be to call it Laura Kinney, instead, which is how Marvel's own wiki handles things to account for code name changes and prevent such confusion when multiple characters have used a given name (however, see the above discussion about the unauthorized page move).


 * As for why her page hasn't been updated for developments during Krakoa, it could be as simple as no one having gotten around to it. -- Ambaryer (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)