Talk:Rogue (Marvel Comics)/Archive 1

Archive 1

X-Treme X-Men Team

Is the X-Treme X-Men Team set in an alternate universe, making it non-canon??(LonerXL (talk) 01:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC))

Hi Jenniferx8 (talk) 03:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Rogue origin

Rogue is not "unusual" for having an origin and name that were unrevealed for years. Wolverine's name was not revealed for thirty years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.201.149.128 (talk) 02:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Rogue Migliaris Image

Beatrix.knight 12:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC) I have used a updated the image with the front cover of the first issue of her 2004 miniseries, while it is not the most recent, i personally find it the most powerful image incorporating Rogue. This image was pencilled by R. Migliaris and coloured by "Transparency Digital". Thank You!

I'm just gonna throw out there that, as it's a comic book character, the I believe the first image the reader is shown should be that of a comic book, preferably a cover. I think that's a great image, but I don't believe it serves the project. I also wonder about its fair use rationale. Which comic book is this image from? Is it from a comic book? If it's just a stand-alone image, it is less fair use than a comic book cover because of the effect our use could have on the market-value of a single image over a comic book. --Psyphics_ΨΦ 02:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Beatrix.knight 19:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC) The image is from Rogue *1 (2004 (of the series running 2004-2005)), This is the cover image of the comic book.

Which I couldn't tell from looking at it. None of the rest of the cover is there, like the title, Marvel logo, so on. It's also stylized, and not at all what Rogue generally looks like. In fact, it's drawn to look like she's real, thus undermining our emphasis on Rogue as a comic book character. A cover image (not just the promotional art for the cover image) of the character, with all the trimmings of the cover included would be great. Especially if it's iconic, but I don't know an iconic Rogue cover so... --Psyphics_ΨΦ 02:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's a horrible choice. It looks more like rogue from the x movies than the comics, it's neither in her current or iconic (the one most people know from the cartoon) costume. I say it should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.34.219 (talk) 05:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Tag Removal

Beatrix.knight 13:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC) I have removed the cleanup and tense tags, as i feel they clutter up the page. In my opinion these tags should either be confined to the discussion page, for us "Rogue Moderators" (as it were) to see and act upon. Most passing readers are put off by the tags. The information on the page is for loyal followers of X-men and Marvel comics, if a reader finds it hard to understand, i feel that this page is the source that allows them to extend their Marvel knowledge. Again, in my opinion i find this page long and detailed and easy to understand, the history andlife of the comic book charater we all know and love. (please post your opinion...) (Thank you for your time)

Sunfire strength

Hey, can someone point me to the issue or whatever where it says Rogue's Sunfire powers give her super-strength? I don't remember Sunfire ever displaying super-strength, but it's not like I have every one of his appearances or anything.

Xtremesage 01:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

no, i do not remember sun fire showing super strength either but.....there's bound to be some issue i have not read.

Uchiha_legacy 17:20, 29 November 2006

Beatrix.knight 12:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC) Although Sunfire never had superhuman strength, the nature of Rogue's powers allow her to enhance her body by ionizing the atoms. (i think!)

That's not evidence. What's the evidence?

Edit

Took all of the history stuff out of the powers section (it can get confusing enough as it is!), most of which was already in the history section at the top. I also moved the info on her Age Of Apocalypse powers to the section on the Age Of Apocalypse Rogue.

Cleaned up her powers section so it clearly defines her various powers at the very stages of her career.

Xtremesage 06:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Added

I added "is a comic book character in the Marvel Comics universe." I think this is important; the ordinary mode of speech has it that, when you mention X, you imply that X exists. Thus it is important to convey up front, one way or another, that fictional and otherwise nonexistent objects are indeed fictional. --LMS

Image

Is there a way to produce images of Rogue which are not copyrighted? I mean that if I link a snapshot (which I have taken), is it copyrighted material?

-As long as material is cited, and permission is given if needed, then I think you're safe. --PW 00:54, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But no, there's no way of producing a truly free image of Rogue - even if you drew and coloured it yourself, Rogue's depiction and costume is still a trademark of Marvel. - SoM 01:04, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

-Oh, I understand what you mean now. Sorry about that. I'm not sure how you could cite material you made of a copywrited image... I would contact Wikipedia. I would love to know. --PW 22:35, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

I went in and did a big re-write on some parts of Rogue's backstory, excising a large chunk dealing with her history when de-powered. This summary seemed to take up a disproportionately large chunk of the article, and was also written in a somewhat informal voice. It may also be worth fact-checking this article with something like the Spotlight On article at UncannyXmen.net. --McC 22:00, 14 Mar 2006 (UTC)

Ultimate Rogue

Rogue in Ultimate Marvel has diverged enough from her Earth-616 counterpart that I think she merits a separate article. Different powers entirely right now (though her original powers, I'd guess, may come back), different history, different relationships, a known name. She's a different character almost entirely except for the streak in her hair and the country accent (which is now interrupted from time to time with faux cajun). Psyphics 17:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Beatrix.knight 13:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC) I agree they are two different characters, they should be seperate.

White Streak in Hair

I think this info should be added back into the article. It's something people are curious about. I saw in the history that someone "deleted the false trivia about the white streak." Well, the part I added about the official Marvel Comics answer about how Rogue got her white streak is not false (they said she bleached it in). It was on an answer-and-question page in one issue of X-Men, iirc. I'm going to look for the issue so that the source can be cited. Now, about the way the X-Men movies deal with Rogue's streak...that is entirely in need of researching. From just viewing the movie, it is seen that Rogue's streak appears when the wave from Magneto's machine hits her hair. I may do some poking around to see if Marvel or the filmmakers answered this explicitly. 151.205.51.198 23:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)a Rogue fan

I took it out because it's not true anymore. I don't know how old your issue is, so, then, it may have been. Earlier in her appearance, Rogue talked about bleaching her hair. However, that was retconned later in the most recent Rogue series, where she has her white streak as a little girl.

And about movie Rogue... well, there was no explanation why she got her streak. Logically, the writers put it in because it's Rogue's trademark. In terms of movie... well... there hasn't ever been an explanation, like I said. She doesn't get it WHEN Magneto's machine hits her hair, she gets it pretty far in when it's already close to Liberty Island. We just don't know where it came from. Evan 06:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I can accept the whole retconned thing. But take a look the next time you rewatch the X-Men movie :) She doesn't have the streak until the wave from Magneto's machine hits her hair and turns it white in the front from the roots on down (it takes a couple of seconds).08:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)a Rogue fan

I'm aware the machine is *active* when she gets the stripe, but it's not when the wave hits her. Given that it never does, because it appears to expand from the machine out. And, even so, it's more than a few moments in before her hair changes. Evan 14:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Just write the streak off as her mutant thing, like Beast's blue fur. Her son with Magneto in Exiles has it too. So it's a mutation which most likely first occured in Rogue.

Now we're back where we started. The whole point was that the Marvel editors said Rogue's white streak was bleached in...definitely *not* a mutant thing. As far as I know, neither is Beast's blue fur. That's a result of one of his experiments gone awry. Unless they "retconned" that as well. I still think that past explanations of things such as Rogue's white streak should be included in the article -- whether or not other explanations have been presented in the different media the X-Men now populate. 151.205.45.33 02:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)a Rogue fan

In the first X-Men movie the white streak is probably the result of her "near-death-experience." Her body experienced traumatic bio-electrical exposure and surely some of her cells, at the very least hair folicles, were killed and/or fundamentally altered through the exchange with Magneto. As for the comics, how hard is it to accept a simple genetic defect like the pigments in her fringe being a lighter colour then the rest of her hair? It would explain the streak being present as a child, and always occuring in her fringe (except for the eighties hairstyle, which I guess could be explained as simply "80's"). -Fan of the Darkholme Family-

I always thought that she was born with a white streak kind of on top of the hair but later (while living with Mystique I think) she dyed it her natural colour and then bleached the two white streaks framing her face in an attempt to look older.

Her hair was retconned. Orginally the white steak was on the side of her head until she joined the X-men. Claremont said that artists were consitently drawing her to look more mature when he wanted her to be in her late teens, so he moved it to the top of her head, saying before she used to dye the sides of her hair instead. Minity 19:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone have a source for this? I recall Claremont saying something about this because of the different takes on Rogue during the joining the X-men period, As I recall, there was a large difference in her apparent age between the Cockrum Rogue, the Byrne Rogue, and the Romita Jr (orange tunic costume) Rogue. However, I think we need a cite to an actual interview transcript or something similar. * In her early appearances as a member of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, Rogue's white highlights were on the side of her head, much like Mr. Fantastic or Nick Fury, confusing some artists and resulting in her being drawn much older than she was intended to be.Gearyster 17:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

In the X-men movie she clearly states to Wolverine, that the white streak is a result of absorbing Magneto's power. Also even if her bleaching her hair was retconned it's still worth mentioning because at one point it was true! 76.223.76.24 (talk) 18:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge Ultimate Rogue with this one?

Per the WP:COMIC talk page, Ultimate character entries should be merged into the character's main article. --Newt ΨΦ 13:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add '''Support''' or '''Oppose''' and add a comment for your vote if you'd like. Sign with ~~~~ --Newt ΨΦ 14:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. Evan 14:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support Dr Archeville 15:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose--Mr Wednesday 21:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support--Chris Griswold 01:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support--Markeer 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose T-Man 09:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC) ult rogue is markedly different from 616 rogue
• Support per WikiProject Comics. --Fritz S. (Talk) 16:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Closed with NO CONSENSUS TO MERGE CovenantD 17:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

I created the article, and per my previous statement below (my username Psyphics) regarding the merit of a separate article, I do believe that Ultimate Rogue has diverged quite a bit from her 616 counterpart (name, powers, accent, relationships, Weapon X). However, I was unaware of the Wikiproject comics policy at the time, and much of the fictional character history should probably be cut out as it's too detailed. That said, I'll leave it up to the community to decide what to do with it. --Newt ΨΦ 13:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't believe we should. It's extensive, and Ultimate Rogue deviates so much from the canon Rogue, it's not illogical to have seperate pages. Plus, I don't believe that's a policy. It's discussed, but it's not official. It isn't necessary to merge the two.

And on a more blue-collar note, how hard can it be to click a link? Evan 13:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

You're correct it's not policy, but it is the current consensus in the comics Wikiproject. The issue is not "clicking a link" but, as I understand it, creating articles that are either too short to be necessary or too detailed to be fair use in order to fill the article. --Newt ΨΦ 14:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

It's consensus if the histories are not significantly divergant, which in this case they are. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

But are they divergent enough to make an article big enough to warrant creating a seperate page? Or can the divergences/changes all be condensed enough so it can fit on Rogue's page? Dr Archeville 15:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Different name, entirely different BG (weapon X etc), different powers. I'd say yes. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 15:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The Ultimate characters are an expanding characters, most likely larger than any other alt universe counterpart. They of all people deserve seperate deviating sites.Mr Wednesday 21:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say the differences are about as big as those betwen the Golden and Silver Age Batman characters, and they are in the same article. --Chris Griswold 21:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd say the main issue for all of these Ultimate characters is level of uniqueness/originality and would follow the general standard of the 'Appearances in other media' sections of many comics articles. I don't believe anyone would argue that the movie version of Rogue deserves a separate article. The main reason for that standard (as I understand it) is that alt-media versions are not separate characters, only separate depictions or interpretations of characters. Lacking a creatively original basis, I'd say Ultimate chars should be referred to in terms of the original. -Markeer 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The Ultimate Rogue is but an offshoot of the main Rogue. If we create a separate article for Ultimate Rogue it gives the false impression that Ultimate Rogue is an entirely different character to the original. If you observe then you can see that the powers are similar, the Gambit-Rogue relationship is still present, the appearance is similar aside from many other things. It's essentially the same character. The Golden Age and Silver Age versions of Batman may be different but they're still within the same Batman article, aren't they? Zuracech lordum 11:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Alter Ego?

I'm curious about this sudden change in Rogue's bio. I understand replacing "Real Name" with "Alter Ego" if you're Superman, but as far as the X-Men go, they possess no alter ego. They're always who they are, they don't pretend to be another person. I'm changing it.

EDIT: It appears to be automatic?

Evan 17:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

That it is. Moreover, I would say that while it's not a "secret identity" it is an "alter-ego". Is who Cyclops always is "Scott Summers" or "Cyclops"? --Newt ΨΦ 18:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Ultimate Rogue merge, revisited

As the author/creator of Ultimate Rogue, and noting that the differences between the two characters are thinning out, I am wondering how long I need to wait before proposing another merge with this article. I've finally seen the light and gotten off the fence about this. --Newt_ΨΦ 16:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I propose the merge. There, now debate. --Jamdav86 16:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Vote

• Merge --Jamdav86 16:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge it's mostly plot summary anyway, and that fails WP:NOT. Nothing needs to be put in this article that wouldn't be covered in Ultimate X-Men or Rogue (comics). --Newt_ΨΦ 18:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge I'm in agreement --Mrph 19:21, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Don't Merge I'd propose a rewrite to put in more information, but seeing as Marvel Comics is planning to make the Ultimate Universe sort of a "second universe", I wouldn't be too quick to merge Ultimate articles with 616 articles just yet.--Tai112 11:52, 19 October 2006 (Eastern)
  • Comment It's not that we're being too quick, it's that this is one of the few that is yet to be merged back with it's 616 parent. Check other Ultimate characters and you'll see. --Newt_ΨΦ 15:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge I also agree --RossF18(16:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC))
• Merge Malevious 00:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Minity (16:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC))
• Merge Michael Podgorski 02:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge At the moment, especially given the recent return of her original powers, a separate article isn't needed. As the Ultimate universe continues to differentiate itself from 616 and the "Ultimate universe" subsection of the Rogue article becomes bulky and unwieldy detailing the various differences, this matter should be brought up again.
• Don't Merge thye are two different people, with almost completely different history. THere fore it should be a different article.Phoenix741 20:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Don't Merge Beatrix.knight 13:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC) Rogue and Marian are two completely different women, they are different in almost every sense, their two respective universes are seperate, therefore they too should be

Discussion closed. Result was MERGE. --Mrph 19:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Merged, could still use some trimmimng --Mrph 23:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ms. Marvel Sixth Sense

While Rogue used all of Ms. Marvel's other powers, I can't think of one moment where she used Ms. Marvel's Sixth/Seventh sense. Did she ever? And if so, is it article entry worthy? Artemisboy 21:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

In the trial of Gambit in Uncanny X-men #350 she uses it and also states that it has not alerted her to anything for a long time, other than that I dont think she used it very often. Minity 16:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

HOUSE of M

What do you all think about adding a section about what Rogue did in the House of M? (RossF18 07:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC))

Beatrix.knight 19:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC) Great Idea

Hair

In the movie magneto said something about her hair and the blondinsh strand she has. What's the deal with that?

He knew that she had the white streak in her hair because of him, he was mocking her. Minity 13:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Rogue Kissing Wolverine

Why was Rogue kissing Wolverine? We should add that in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.78.105.97 (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

That happened awhile ago, there was something called Gologatha that made everyone act all weird, it wasnt anything major. Minity 13:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Rogue and Gambit

Are they still dating? How does Rogue not kill him?We should include more on their current relationship. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.78.105.97 (talk) 19:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

We don't include more because they're not a couple, and we have heard nothing more of Gambit other than the confirmation of his existence in upcoming issues. 74.70.7.38 00:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rouge24.jpg

Image:Rouge24.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 Wikipedia: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 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 10:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC) the gouru axle relpies . gambits is constantly giving of an excess of kinetic energy, rouge absorbs that energy that why they can touch there powers cancel each other out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.31.142.2 (talk) 05:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Changing the picture

I propose changing the picture. The background is too busy with other X-Men and frankly, the art is just bad. The inker went overboard, Finch doesn't have a great grasp of anatomy and the face looks like every other female Finch has ever drawn.

Lots42 08:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we should keep it. It shows her full and current constume and it isn't bad artwork. Plus you can harldy ee the other X-Men in the backround.

Thelaststand3

But you can still see them. I agree; too busy. She looks demented, as well. Flutterby Lullaby 10:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree it should be changed. I vote either Bachalo's recent cover to X-Men #192 or Rogue's 3rd mini series issue 3 as it demonstrates her likeness and power perfectly04nbod 02:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)04nbod

Powers as a psychological problem?

Its been stated by OMUH Women of Marvel 2005 that Rogue's inability to control her power is psychological in nature, is there any other evidence of this other than this reference? Or was it just a mistake? (Minity 14:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC))

Clean UP

How about doing some cleanup of the article. It's way too long. Do we really need every story arc Rogue is involved with discussed? For a character created in the 80s, she has longer article than most of the original X-Men. Any agreement on this and anyone willing to do so? (RossF18 17:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC))

I second this. This is a huge article and not in line with her notability in the team. There is a lot of fan cruft in the article. Naturally everyone has their favorite Rogue story if you are an X-fan, but doe sit really need to be in the Wikipedia entry? I would vote for considerable cutting in the summary /history, keep the descriptions of the various powers/abilities (although I'm ambivalent on that as well) and generally making this less of a retelling of the comics. COuld this all be moved to the wiki on Marvel.com? is it duplicative of that info? http://www.marvel.com/universe/Rogue Actually, looking at that briefly, it may be a better article than this!Gearyster 17:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Blinded by the Light?

To those that have, several times now, changed the subheading of Messiah Complex to Blinded by the Light: that's a ridiculous title first of all that has nothing to do with anything, and second of all, the current X-Men arc is a part of the Messiah Complex. It's an appropriate title, until we have more information about the arc. I fail to see how Blinded by the Light is more reasonable. At least with Messiah Complex readers understand where we are in the story. Your heading is both non-informing and a little piece of fan poetry. Please stop changing it back to that. 74.70.7.38 23:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The current story in X-Men has nothing to do with Messiah Complex. Messiah Complex does not start until November. The current arc in which The Marauders have attacked the X-Men is called "Blinded By The Light" It should be called this becuase what's going on now does not have anythign to do with Messiah Complex becuase it hasn't even started yet. Thelaststand3 14:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

First of all, it could have everything to do with Messiah Complex. We don't know that it doesn't. Second of all, if you buy the comic, the top corner of the cover says "Messiah Complex". It IS a part of the arc. And, still, Blinded by the Light makes FAR less sense than "Messiah Complex". Give me a good reason why that title makes more sense. 74.70.7.38 20:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The only thing that it says in the top part of the comics is that there is an Engendered Species back up story in the comic book. Nothing about Messiah Complex. While I'm opposed to describing every thing story arc (supporting instead summarizing several story arcs in one paragraph that link together), if we are going to name story arcs, we should give them correct names. Current arc is called "Guided by the Light". Messiah Complex hasn't started yet. While the current story arc may have something to do with the Messiah Complex, let's not just guess before hand. If you want, do that after you've read the Messiah Complex arc. Not before hand. (RossF18 15:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC))

Name

Name in the biobox and main article don't match, and I don't know which is correct. Could someone fix it please? WLU 19:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll remove the surname of "Raven" in the biobox since it isn't confirmed as her last name. She simply used the name Anna Raven as an alias when her powers were inactive. What was confirmed is her first name of Anna Marie. --Andrew Filipe 01:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Question......How and when did everyone in the world besides those who remember the unusually obscure somehow forget that Rogue DOES have a last name? There was a newspaper article in the Las Vegas, Nevada publication of the "Las Vegas Review-Journal" weeks before the release of "X2: X-Men United" in theaters that clearly identified her as "Anna Marie D'Ancanto". Or has this been retconned, too? -- CorinthMaxwell

Marie D'Ancanto was the full name given to Rogue in the first X-Men film, before she was given any name (first or last) in the comic books. It was a name dreamed up out of nowhere for the her in the movies, and has little relevence to Rogue outside the movies. It is not her real name within the canon of the comic books. 76.16.57.78 (talk) 23:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

This is not true. The name D'Ancanto was never mentioned in the movie. As far as I can tell, it's just an internet meme that Rogue's last name is D'Ancanto. 110.174.166.224 (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

About "Anna Marie Raven." In "Going Rogue" 4, Gambit finds her into a motel, asking for "Anna Raven," thus Rogue's complete name would result to be: "Anna Marie Raven." Isn't it ? AndresNArce (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)theweirdalien

Fair use rationale for Image:Rogue by Chris Bachalo.jpg

Image:Rogue by Chris Bachalo.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 Wikipedia: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) 19:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Xevo rogue.jpg

Image:Xevo rogue.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 08:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rogue-20060505024611416.jpg

Image:Rogue-20060505024611416.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 06:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rogue.jpg

Image:Rogue.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 06:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RogueAoA.jpg

Image:RogueAoA.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 06:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rogue-20060505024611416.jpg

Image:Rogue-20060505024611416.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 04:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rogue.jpg

Image:Rogue.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 04:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RogueAoA.jpg

Image:RogueAoA.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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 04:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

relatinship with gambit rogue has endured a relationship with the cajun since 1991,they have had an on again off again relationship but have still remained —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1bulma1 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Mutants with Healing factors

How is Rouge able to harm mutants (like Wolverine or Sabretooth) that have healing factors? Shouldn't their healing be able to replace whatever energy she takes out? Also, in the movie, why did Wolverines injuries reopen when Rouge touched him. They seemed completely healed and the last time I checked, injuries that completly heal don't just re-open. Emperor001 (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought she actually took their powers, not just gained the same powers. As in Wolverine can no longer heal. With what happened in the film, I think that's because they had to show it some how. They also said in the film that she took peoples 'life force'. That might account for it.Dannman (talk) 14:25, 11 January 2014 (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 Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Done - the article is peppered with requests for sources and a tag asking for the PH to be expanded so it fails on two fronts and is bumped down to a C. (Emperor (talk) 17:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC))

Clarification Needed

This page mentions "Strain 88" and "death touch" without any explanation. I wanted to read up on Rogue but I have no idea what these terms actually mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.146.119 (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• Done. I also cleaned a lot of the non-notable sections of the biography out of the page.Luminum (talk) 02:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:RogueVs Warbird.jpg

The image Image:RogueVs Warbird.jpg 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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Real Name

Where is her real name given and Anna Marie? All of the sources I've seen (other than the films) give her name as unknown or unrevealed. In the films, she is simply Marie. Emperor001 (talk) 15:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Images

There are a total of 8 differnt Rogue images, which is clearly not minimal use of these non-free images. With so many, I'd like to think there's some give here. My suggestion is to keep the herobox image, Rogue/Ms. Marvel, and Anna Paquin, the rest, while cool Rogue storylines and animated series, are not that distinctive of representations of the character or illustrate points of the article significantly. Rogue/Ms.Marvel illustrates the interwoven history of the two, and the Paquin is the most prominent other media representation. - Sharp962 (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC).

I have to agree, though I believe we should also keep an image with her current costume (the green one with the cape/hood).24.190.34.219 (talk) 03:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. The images of her in different media are not used for decoration and no free versions are available. The use here is in line with Wikipedia's fair use policy. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It's too many for our policies. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 22:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Wolverine & the X-Men

"Rogue appears to maintain her anti-social attitude that appeared in X-Men: Evolution, yet has a strong bond with Logan..."

Wolverine and the X-Men is not a follow up, nor a sequal, nor in any way related to the X-Men: Evolution cartoon, other than it features the X-Men. So stating that she maintains her attitude from an un-related program seems somewhat inappropriate and misleading. Reading this as it is, it is somewhat implied that Wolverine and the X-Men is directly related. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.163.105 (talk) 01:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

• Perhaps something along the lines of "Her personality is similar to that of the X-Men: Evolution version of the character" would be more appropriate —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.150.129 (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Page name

Would anyone object if I change it to, say, "Rogue (Marvel)"? It's obviously not just about the comics character anymore...--little Alex (talk) 19:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I would! -Golem866 (talk) 21:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Sentry

In terms of meeting the Sentry, it should be established that the Sentry himself has a loose grasp on what did and did not happen in the past. (And for that matter, all of Earth has forgotten he existed for a loong time). Lots42 (talk) 20:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Rogue's strength

tip: Uncanny X-Men 217 establishes Rogue's strength as lifting fifty-seven tons at the gym, with much effort AndyNArce (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)theweirdalien

Rogue's Ms. Marvel Powers

I was just curious about why it says that Rogue could achieve Supersonic flight. Ms. Marvel (Carol Danvers) cannot currently do so, and couldn't when Rogue stole her powers. According to Ms. Marvel Vol. 2 #50, her flight speed is roughly half the speed of sound. It is also mentioned that Ms. Marvel can fly at this speed here on Wikipedia. If Rogue duplicated her powers, this is how fast she should fly also. In addition, the article did not, until I changed it, mention Rogue's virtual invulnerability (due to her Human/Kree physiology), her superhuman speed, or her superhuman reflexes that are all granted by the powers absorbed from Ms. Marvel. I changed this article once, and it was changed back, but with this evidence I think that it should remained changed. If I made a mistake, please let me know, I'm sort of new at this editing of articles stuff, but I do want it to be correct. Thank you.

Someone's since changed the article to say "sub-sonic" again, but just for the record: In Uncanny X-Men #247, Rogue does achieve supersonic flight by absorbing Colossus's powers and flying straight towards Earth. (Obviously Chris Claremont failed physics, since we all know that an object's mass has no affect on how fast it falls.) I have little doubt that that's where the editor you're referring to got the mistaken idea that Rogue can go supersonic as a general rule.--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Creator credit?

Should Mike Vosburg rather than Michael Golden be credited as the character's co-creator as he partially penciled what was to be her first appearance (although it wasn't completed and only released, in altered form, in 1992)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.4.34.23 (talk) 19:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I can't see any reason why either of them should be credited as the character's co-creator. There's no source substantiating any aspect of how the character was created. I tried doing an internet search, but couldn't find anything beyond a couple sites which passingly refer to Chris Claremont as "Rogue's co-creator". So, I'm going to take down all the "created by" claims from the article. Hopefully someone will be able to dig up a source for who created Rogue; I'll certainly be keeping an eye out as I dig through issues of Comics Interview and Back Issue Magazine.--NukeofEarl (talk) 17:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Don't we know who wrote her first appearance? 129.33.19.254 (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Depends on what "first appearance" means in Rogue's case. Her first published appearance was in Avengers Annual #10, but she appeared in the partially-completed Ms. Marvel #25 before that, and for all we know the major design work was done even earlier. For instance, Nightcrawler was essentially created years before there were any comic books, even unpublished ones, with him in it. But back to your question, yeah, we know who wrote both Avengers Annual #10 and Ms. Marvel #25, but which one would you call her first appearance?--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I guess all that really matters is who came up with the idea for the character, for the story she was written in, and with the Marvel Method who first drew her. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 15:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)