Talk:List of X-Men members/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Current members of the X-Men

I noticed that from time to time, some characters' codename are being bolded indicating that they are currently members of the X-Men. Yet there is no reference in this article - where readers can see the current members of the X-Men. I suggest if someone's gonna update the current members of the X-Men by bolding their codename, should also add a reference (preferably a reference that mentions the comic book issue). Hotwiki (talk) 14:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I have been thinking about it. I read comics so I can say that we should reinstate bolding members and leave that job for someone who reads the comics constantly - who have easy access and resources for comics easily, because I don't think we should need references for bolding the current members. For example if a member leaves X-Men in the comics, we will also need to add references why we removed bold font from that member (In case an editor restart bolding that member just because there is no reference of their removal) and most of the newspapers or sources don't even bother to make an article especially for old members when they re-join. The references regarding pop culture especially comics varies like in the above mentioned cases. I had also noticed that without reaching consensus on the talk page, the whole concept of bold members was removed from this article - which I think is not good. Other articles on Wikipedia regarding similar lists like this article still have the bold concept and if edit war happens regarding any member's status, we an always settle dispute in talk page instead of adding or removing as we see fit. Sewnbegun (talk) 11:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

At the moment, there is no reason to specify who are the current members of the X-Men as those who were bolding names - indicating certain characters are members, can't provide a reference in the first place. Also this is merely a List of X-Men members. Current members of the X-Men are already highlighted in the infobox of the Wikipedia article of the X-Men. Hotwiki (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

And fyi, I also just read a bunch of new X-Men comics recently. So if you're implying that I don't read the comics, then thats just your opinion and not a fact. Also editing this page isn't a job. Everyone here is welcome to edit this page as long as they follow the rules. If you were so adamant removing "unreferenced" information.[1] You admitted in your user talk page that you were that Ip user, then you shouldn't question other editors for removing unreferenced information as well. Hotwiki (talk) 14:15, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Did I mentioned you @Hotwiki in above discussion? No, then what you told above is also your opinion of me which you clearly misunderstood because I WASN'T implying that. And what I admitted was that I MADE AN EDIT WHILE BEING LOGGED OUT, ONCE WHEN I REALIZE THAT I WAS LOGGED OUT, I LOGGED IN AND CONTINUED MY EDITS. I didn't admitted what you are implying here. I can question an editor if they remove an important part of the page (that remained for years) by only adding an discussion in the talk and not waiting for consensus to reach. Even though I agree with you on the infobox thing. Sewnbegun (talk) 15:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Then it is absolutely fine with me if the X-Men members are listed in the infobox of that Wikipedia page. Sewnbegun (talk) 14:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"most of the newspapers or sources don't even bother to make an article especially for old members when they re-join." At this point, I am not even certain whether hardcore readers are aware when characters leave or rejoin the X-Men. The Utopia crossover (2009) effectively resulted in the X-Men establishing their own state and inviting all of the surviving mutants to move in with them. For several years, the X-Men were living with and co-operating with a large number of former students of the Xavier Institute, various past allies, and villains who took up the offer to join them. A decade later, in the Dawn of X relaunch (2019), the X-Men established a state with an even larger population, inviting most of their past allies and foes to join them. Resulting in several closely affiliated teams, and a huge cast of characters for several years. Which of them are X-Men and which are allies is not that clear anymore. Dimadick (talk) 01:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Which is best to NOT highlight who are the current members of the X-Men. Highlighting who are the "current" members of the X-Men would just lead to more editors, updating the current membership without leaving a reference. This was already the case before and most of the time, it also led to misinformation. The Wikipedia article of X-Men, doesn't even line up to this article, as a bunch of editors just update the current members of the X-Men in the infobox of that article without any reference. Hotwiki (talk) 06:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we should leave the current members of X-Men to the infobox only. Sewnbegun (talk) 07:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

That is why we should rely on References along with previous/future Handbooks. Sewnbegun (talk) 07:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Captain Krakoa

In which comic book issues is Cyclops called as Captain Krakoa as member of the X-Men? Hotwiki (talk) 10:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ringardiumleviossa: also in which comic book issue Piotr Rasputin used the codename "Juggernaut" as a member of the X-Men? I'm just verifying the reverted changes recently. Hotwiki (talk) 10:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Comic book issue in which Emma Frost was called as the Black Queen as a member of the X-Men, as well. Hotwiki (talk) 10:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Cyclops as Captain Krakoa in X-Men vol. 6 #6 as disguise.

Colossus as Juggernaut in Uncanny X-Men #542 when he got powers of Cyttorak.

She was using it when she left Dark X-Men to join X-Men in Dark Avengers #8 and used it briefly before Schism. Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you have comic books scans of those issues for verification. I've read those issues in the past but I cannot recall if they ever used those codenames as members of the X-Men. Hotwiki (talk) 10:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you remember White Queen dressing as whole black and not white dress atleast once while with other X-Men? (Used Black Queen codename then) Or Colossus getting the powers of Juggernaut? And Captain Krakoa is the the latest one in Krakoan Age as he used Captain Krakoa suit. Search in internet or read those comics to clear it. Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 10:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I have read those issues in the past. But for verification, I want to see if they used those codenames as members of the X-Men. Also Cyclops as Captain Krakoa doesn't really count since it was a disguise. I wouldn't have brought those up if you didn't include them in the article, so I'm merely asking for a reference. Hotwiki (talk) 11:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't have references or scans. That's why I asked to you to read those comics. Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 11:15, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki For Cyclops: For Colossus: Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I will look at those later in less than 24 hours. Hotwiki (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki Verify them and if you more, I can provide you, then add them to this article. The talk page in this article is way too slow for consensus and every changes in this article (even the little ones) have to go through the talk. That's why I'm not getting myself to edit article again. Feel free to do edits from mg sandbox if you think that will improve this page. Ringardiumleviossa (talk) 08:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Scott Summers used Captain Krakoa codename for more than 6 issues. @Hotwiki, how can you be [talking about consensus] regarding Captain Krakoa codename even if you were given references here and that too reliable ones? 2409:40C1:10BC:D198:5549:7648:8F85:AAC4 (talk) 11:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, I disagree. He was in disguise as Captain Krakoa. Hotwiki (talk) 12:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

But people regarded Captain Krakoa as their superhero and then everybody know it was Scott Summers codename. You just don't to add that codename that's all. 2409:40C1:10BC:D198:5549:7648:8F85:AAC4 (talk) 12:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, I'm really suspicious about these Ip users, Sewnbegun and the blocked user Ringardiumleviossa. You all seem to be having the same edits. All of Ringardiumleviossa's proposal in this talkpage are being implemented in the article by Sewnbegun and the recent IP users, without adding a comment in the talk page. Another big example is both Sewnbegun and Ringardiumleviossa have the entire List of X-Men members in their sandbox. Sewnbegun's account was created, the day after Ringardiumleviossa was blocked for editing. Hotwiki (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please be considerate to link the users you have been mentioning so that they can also get notify of the discussion. 2409:40C1:10BC:D198:5549:7648:8F85:AAC4 (talk) 12:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a rule for blocked editors. You cannot just switch through another Ip adress via VPN or switch through another Wikipedia account, especially to persuade article discussion/consensus. Ringardiumleviossa was blocked for sockpuppetry. Now, for these Ip users and Sewnbegun who seem to be doing Ringardiumleviossa's proposed changes. I would like to read your thoughts about this before I address this to sockpuppet investigation. Hotwiki (talk) 12:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun 2402:A00:162:3490:4587:1E5C:2AAD:9092 (talk) 16:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

If you had seen my sandbox, then you might know that most of edits are regarding X-Men and that my sandbox didn't only contain information regarding this page but also once contain X-Men page's information (which doesn't mean anything). Even though they have reliable sources, I wasn't the one who added who added months even it was agreed by census, I wasn't the one who added Captain Krakoa. Which of Ringardiumleviossa's proposals are you asking that I implemented? So @Hotwiki, you can do whatever you want to do as I have also said before. Sewnbegun (talk) 18:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned Ip users alongside you, when I said I'm being suspicious if Ringardiumleviossa just switched account and an Ip address. You and these Ip users, don't really edit a lot of Wikipedia article aside from this one. Also you and these IP users, only started editing, when Ringardiumleviossa was blocked last February 2024. So the timing is VERY suspicious and a lot of the changes you and the Ip users have done in this page, are similar to what Ringardiumleviossa was trying to do in this talk page. Like with Ringardiumleviossa, I told that blocked editor to provide references everytime that editor made a dozen of edits, which you have also been doing a lot lately (name edits, membership of the mutants, etc) and I've told you to provide references which you questioned in the past. Ringardiumleviossa's edits are very similar to you, in my observation. I haven't reported you yet for sockpuppet investigation as I'm still observing your edits, and I haven't reported anyone yet for a sockpuppet investigation yet. So this would be my first. The date of your account registration, the dozens of similar edits to Ringardiumleviossa, and the similarity of your sandbox to the sandbox of Ringardiumleviossa are red flags. Hotwiki (talk) 18:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

How can it be similar when what I just did was copy-pasted the last version (before pasting on my sandbox) of the page? I also saw the sandbox of Ringardiumleviossa, see carefully and you'll see great differences. You are welcome to go ahead with the sockpuppet investigation and I won't participate in it. I didn't wanted to do anything with Captain Krakoa - the topic we are currently, but now I want consensus regarding this. Sewnbegun (talk) 19:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Let me repeat myself. You registered the day after Ringardiumleviossa was banned. I didn't encounter anyone in my many years in Wikipedia, other than you and Ringardiumleviossa have this article copied/pasted in their sandbox page. Also similar edits/patterns. The way you how express yourself in this talkpage and then making a dozen of changes (big or small) are very similar to the blocked editor. It gave me flashbacks. Also, the blocked editor was blocked for making sockpuppet accounts and who knows, if another account was made. Its certainly a possibility given their history. Hotwiki (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Removal of Indra

Removal of Indra because he is not official X-Men in training. Sewnbegun (talk) 11:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

No, don't remove Indra. Let me explain why - there are three Marvel handbook that listed X-Men extensively - Official Handbook of Marvel Universe A to Z #13 (2010), X-Men: Earth's Mutant Heroes #1 (2011) and X of Swords Handbook #1 (2020). Danger from X-Club and X-Force members after Vanisher were removed and those removals were valid because they were not listed in any of the above mentioned three handbooks. Indra was listed in along with other trainees in X-Men: Earth's Mutant Heroes #1 but he wasn't listed in X of Swords Handbook (it was simple error). That was why Indra was included with X-Men-in-training section many years ago. Here is the image[2] for it. Another error happened was in Official Handbook of Marvel Universe A to Z where Cipher was mentioned to be member of sub-team in the year 2002, even before her debut which was in 2008. Here is the image[3] for it. In the same handbook Longshot's joining comic was wrong. Here is the image[4] for it. Another error happened in X of Swords Handbook where several codenames were wrong because they didn't used them as X-Men like Betsy Braddock - Captain Britain, Kwannon - Psylocke, Gabby Kinney - Scout. Here is the image[5] for it. Although handbooks are canon, errors sometimes happen. Reinstate Indra in the list on the basis of above points and solicitation of this - . 2409:40C1:1023:5D0C:BDF8:DE8B:9AE9:9F5C (talk) 04:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I have added him back. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Future members

Someone just added "members" appearing in new comic book titles to be released in July/September of 2024. Please don't add them until those comic books are already released. Hotwiki (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Consensus on Captain Krakoa

@Eijikkieru, @Higher Further Faster, @Hotwiki, @DrBat, @Gtrmp, @AlligatorSky, @Lipshiz, @Omnipaedista, @BD2412 and also @Dimadick, you have been invited here because of being top editors of some X-Men pages along with being active at Wikipedia last month; as the top contributors of this page are either retired, blocked or had simply stopped editing. The invitation is for the consensus on whether Captain Krakoa should be added alongside Cyclops or not; on the basis of recent comics of X-Men (Volume 6) and on the basis of these references which were already provided above discussions. ( and ) Sewnbegun (talk) 19:52, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. Hotwiki (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I also oppose, Captain Krakoa was just a disguise for Cyclops in X-Men (vol. 6). AlligatorSky (talk) 13:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

That is my reasoning as well. Hotwiki (talk) 13:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. Same reasoning as above. Eijikkieru (talk) 00:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

It appears we can finally close this suggestion, originally proposed by the blocked editor User:Ringardiumleviossa by not adding Captain Krakoa as a codename of Cyclops as a member of the X-Men. Hotwiki (talk) 07:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, we should close this discussion since the consensus is very clear against it. Sewnbegun (talk) 07:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, may I add, you changed certain words to "this team", thats not encyclopedic and not very formal way of writing. Don't also remove the current description to Lucid, especially that character has no Wikipedia article to check/read. So a more substantial description for Lucid, instead of just a "honorable mention" would be better. You keep changing a dozen of things here that aren't very helpful, and it is really reminiscent of the blocked User:Ringardiumleviossa. Can an administrator, please check if User:Ringardiumleviossa and User:Sewnbegun are the same editor? I don't really know how to file a report on Sockpuppet investigation, a help would be appreciated in this situation. Hotwiki (talk) 12:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Also for those names, you don't need to add a reference to every single name in this article, especially if those names weren't being challenged or questioned in the first place. A reference for each character joining the X-Men, specifically a reference to the comic-book issue in which they joined as a member is enough. Hotwiki (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki, firstly, you reverted Ringardiumleviossa's edits when they made changes in this page on the basis of as per Wikipedia page - [6]. And now let me repeat your word when you reverted my edits - [7] (Again, you don't really need to add a reference to every single name, especially those who have a Wikipedia article. This is a list of X-Men members. Not list of names of X-Men characters.). Secondly, I also noticed you only choose only certain names from Ringardiumleviossa's proposal and till this date you keep reverting any changes in name section (if they are different from your original edit) until they are referenced. And now here you say these names don't need to be referenced? I still don't get the meaning of both of above mentioned situation. You even reverted my all edits not even thinking that some of the names were being challenged and changed by providing reliable sources. I think you are very good editor on the Wikipedia and very busy one but at least watch/read the changes in the edits and not just peak over it so that you know that not all changes/edits are invalid and then make appropriate edits instead of reverting it all. I understand your point that not all names need references and it is the page of list of X-men members (and not of names), but if I had made any unreferenced edit, it would have been reverted back. If I have to change certain names which are misinformed in this article, I will have to provide references. I am not going to add the sources to every name this time, just only those which are misinformed or incomplete here. Thank you! Sewnbegun (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Based from your edits, you seemed to accomplish what User:Ringardiumleviossa what wanted to do in the article. Your account was created, the day after User:Ringardiumleviossa was blocked in Wikipedia. When it comes to wanting to mention "Captain Krakoa" in this article, you both share the same opinion. Both of your sandbox are suspiciously the same.[8][9] Based from talk page activity of this article, aside from me, you are heavily active discussing changes just like the blocked editor. Like the blocked editor you are constantly making "drastic" changes into this article, and doesn't seem to be editing plenty of other articles aside from this one. @CoffeeCrumbs: since I noticed you, in the talk page of Ringardiumleviossa, can I ask if you could help me about a sockpuppet investigation, if @Sewnbegun: is connected to Ringardiumleviossa. Their editing pattern is suspiciously very similar. Hotwiki (talk) 19:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki I didn't have the same opinion in the Captain Krakoa as Ringardiumleviossa. Read above talks again and you know I never said I wanted Captain Krakoa codename to be added because in fact I wanted to go with consensus instead. That is why I added Consensus on Captain Krakoa talk and also because you keep reverting my edits and I was angry because of this talk [10]. @CoffeeCrumbs understand what is happening by reading exact above reply and the discussion here [11], because Hotwiki is always controlling this page. Reverting unreferenced change? I get that, but why revert whole and every edits without checking that there could be some valid information there. Also, I am not accomplishing Ringardiuleviossa's proposal, all I am doing is just editing on the basis of reliable sources. So you can't remove those without discussing first. I do edit this page primarily from few days because I am also editing the same articles in various websites (including Marvel Database/Wiki) and if you see my edit history, I have also edited some different Wikipedia pages too. And again I am telling, you are welcome to sock puppet investigation on me. Sewnbegun (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I will oppose because of the same reasoning as above. Teedbunny (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

This discussion needs to be closed. Teedbunny (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Drastically changing the order of the members

I noticed an Ip user have made their first edit in this article, drastically changing the order of the members and also changing the opening lead like as if there was anything wrong.[12] Then when I reverted it, @Sewnbegun:, reverted it to that edit of the Ip User.[13] From last month, it just seems quite suspicious "drastic" changes have been happening from IP users in the article. These IP users who haven't edited in the past and making their 1st edit in this article. And those edits usually lined up / are always in favor with @Sewnbegun:. Hotwiki (talk) 22:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Also in the same day, another Ip user made their FIRST edit in this talk page.[14] It IS their only edit in Wikipedia as of now. And once again @Sewnbegun: agreed to that Ip user. I'm really suspicious if these Ip users and Sewnbegun are just one person and Sewnbegun is jumping through different ips and making these drastic changes to the article. I'm also still suspicious about @Sewnbegun: related to the blocked editor User:Ringardiumleviossa, that editor was blocked for sockpuppetry and I have made a list in this talkpage of why I think Sewnbegun/the blocked editor Ringardiumleviossa, are the same person in the past here[15] I just haven't reported it to the administrators yet, because there's a long wait list in Sockpuppet Investigation and I haven't properly reported anyone yet for sockpuppet investigation.

Hotwiki (talk) 22:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I honestly want to hear the opinion from other editors aside from Sewnbegun about this.@Dimadick: I think you might be aware of most of the discussion in the last several weeks. The editing of Sewnbegun/Ringardiumleviossa are quite similar. Also in the past, I haven't any encountered IP users making/proposing BIG changes to this article, especially for their FIRST edit in Wikipedia, until Ringardiumleviossa was blocked and Sewnbegun started editing this article. Very suspicious. This talkpage proposal[16] alone couldn't come from someone who isn't invested about this article in the past. Hotwiki (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

From March 2024. These are the Ip users that made their first EDIT in Wikipedia through this article:[17][18][19][20][21][22]Hotwiki (talk) 23:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Then these are the IP users that made their 1st edit in Wikipedia through the talkpage of this article, in March 2024:[23][24][25][26]Hotwiki (talk) 23:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki, I have this article on my watchlist and probably so do you, and unlike others I read what edits are done before reverting. Why removed the chronological order of Time displaced X-Men and Genoshan assult team? They are legit because when the edits were made by the IP addresses, I read those comics to confirm which I am still doing currently. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:07, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

All Genoshan Assault X-Men members joined in the same issue. All 5 time displaced original X-Men member also joined in the same issue. So changing of the order is not really needed. Hotwiki (talk) 05:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is true @Hotwiki but let me explain, time displaced X-Men are the same X-Men of Earth-616 (just displaced in time and finally send back) so they had joined that in same order as original members because they themselves are original members - Cyclops, Iceman, Beast, Angel, Marvel Girl.

---

No let's talk about Genoshan assault team. Nightcrawler, Wolverine, Banshee, Storm, Sunfire, Colossus, Thunderbird on this article had joined in the same issue but are listed in the chronological order of when Professor X recruited them (like he recruited Nightcrawler first and Thunderbird last). When I read Uncanny X-Men #392 yesterday, it was clear that Jean Grey had recruited the members in the order of Frenzy, Northstar, Wraith, Omerta, Sunpyre and lastly Dazzler.

---

I checked it and actually read those edits before reverting or making any changes. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I disagree, its not necessary. The order has been like this for years and no one had an issue about it. The only TWO that want to change is you and this IP user[27]. Hotwiki (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Why do you control this page so much, it is not like wat you decide/agree will happen in this article? Again I might clear, I checked and re-read those comics If the order is been in years that doesn't mean it can't be changed if the necessity arrives or they are evident. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaborative site. If an editor sees they have a good reason to revert something, they are allowed to do that. Hotwiki (talk) 05:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia is collaborative site and yet you revert everything (not something) without watching. What about the reason of being what is right/evident? What about the reason of being organisation. Anyways, if you also see the handbooks of the order of same character joining in same comics in the handbooks, they are alphabetical except those whose chronological joining order is clear. It is another evidence. [28], [29] and [30]. Let me about this issue in teahouse to other experience editors. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't revert everything.[31][32][33] One of those links shows your edit, which I didn't revert. Hotwiki (talk) 05:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Because you have no solid reason to revert them anyway. You reverted many names, so I had to add references to prove it. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I simply reverted back the order which was already in the article for years in the first place. You claimed I revert everything in this article, and I just gave you 3 edits from this month, from 3 different editors that I didn't revert. One of those 3 is you. Hotwiki (talk) 05:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Anyways, according to Manual of Style/Comics, one of the list format is chronological order (which this page is) but what about those whose chronological order is not clear, there is also another format mentioned which is alphabetical order. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, I already disagreed with your proposed changes. Wait for others to comment about this. Hotwiki (talk) 06:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah maybe you just reverted back the order which was already in year but when it need to be change because of proven points, you still did not agreed. Wikipedia is collaborative site. It is not I am doing any fancruft here. I presented it with points. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I didn't agree and you were also told by me to discuss this in the talk page. So other editors can have their own say. I said my case, and wait for other editors to futher comment on this. Hotwiki (talk) 05:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

So on the basis of handbook orders; some similarities (in order) of the main team and sub-team; chronological joining order; and Manual of Style/Comics formats, I am going to make some correction for the sake of organisation. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, wait for a consensus. You do know you are edit warring, by making a change that someone already disagreed with. This is why Talk pages exist, to prevent edit wars. So don't revert in the article, and wait for a consensus. Hotwiki (talk) 06:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I am only editing because of all the evidence/points I laid out. I will wait for 1-2 days for the sake of consensus but I have to make those changes because not many editor participate actively in this talk page. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thats not how consensus work. If there aren't more editors that agree with your proposed changes. You can't be restoring something which someone already disagreed with. Hotwiki (talk) 06:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Lets invite some those who have participated last day on previous talk. @Dimadick, @Storm1221, can you read this topic please and give your feedbacks? Sewnbegun (talk) 06:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll also ask about this issue in Teahouse too. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry if you feel that way @Hotwiki, you can say anything but maybe you should see this points; and regarding other editors, we both know not many editors are constantly active in this page except you, me and probably that blocked user using different IP. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

That blocked editor which is NOT clear if you aren't connected to that blocked editor. I think we have exhausted this topic in this talk.page. I'll just make a sockpuppet investigation petiti9n this week, so administrators can finally review your account/edits. These numerous IP users will be mentioned as well. Hotwiki (talk) 06:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure, you can do that investigation. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hotwiki, according to Wikipedia:Consensus, we can opt for third party opinion, which is here related to this issue. Sewnbegun (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

There's still no consensus in this talkpage, so I don't know why you are reverting it again. I already told you to wait for more editors to share their thoughts. Also the opening paragraph is fine as it is. Hotwiki (talk) 06:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I had invite two more editors (for third party opinion) who are lastly active in this talk page, because there is no more than two editors active currently includiny you and me. They are still active on Wikipedia but chose not engage so I sought third party opinion in Teahouse, which is totally okay if you read Wikipedia:Consensus. So I made the edit on the basis of that. I am again open to wait for a weak but we don't have to ignore that teahouse opinion, won't we? Anyway I am going to request a comment too. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you can see in this talkpage, there IS one ACTIVE member that is in total disagreement with this change and suggested to wait for more editors to share their thoughts. What you are doing by reverting to the version of the "IP user" which you think is from the blocked editor User:Ringardiumleviossa by the way, is disruptive editing. Hotwiki (talk) 06:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I am not reverting to the version of the "IP user". See clearly please. I only made the revert on the basis of order patterns already in some sections of this afticle (order patterns now I think need correction, even if it has been in here for years). To less degree also on the basis of handbooks. On the basis of list formats that are clearly listed on Manual of Style (Comics) (which clearly don't need consensus but I am going to wait). And lastly on the basis of the answer I got from teahouse. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, you were told to wait for consensus and for other editors to make a comment in this talkpage and you didn't, and went ahead by reverting again. This discussion in the talkpage was started by me, to prevent edit warring and for other editors to share their thoughts. You shouldn't revert to a contested version of the article, just because you couldn't wait for more editors to chime in. It hasn't been that long as well. Hotwiki (talk) 07:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

This page is very stable and if are to focus on presentation, there is already sortable order in this page, chronological order and alphabetical order will be great from the view of both presentation and logic. Teedbunny (talk) 13:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)