HoX/PoX #1 Preview Pages

[Shortpack!]

Were they ever seen with women? Did they ever allude to relationships with women?

They were seen with Mystique and Destiny, of course. That totally...

...wait...

Nevermind.

[Decoy]

OG Pyre and Avalanche were most def brosexual. No bromo. JK That came out wrong.

Did Avalanche have a daughter or something. Is he alive? Bring him back!

They where the Duo of Evil like Taskmaster and Black Ant are now......

Wait, the Previews for HOX 1 show and mention Banshee, who was rendered more dead in UXM 21.......really need a Annual to bridge those gaps and reveal some stuff........and I thought X was hiding the fact he was back from most of the team with only Betsy knowing he was back........

[Big Joe]

Then why is Warren listed as Archangel instead of Angel? First appearance X-men #3 instead of #1? That page has errors and M's may be one too

They're not errors though, are they? Seriously does anyone think Marvel wouldn't notice that sort of"mistake"? Or that Toad's first appearance is wrong as well? This is deliberately done. It is changing the history of the X-Men maybe the brotherhood is going to be Blob, Toad, Archangel and others.

[scourge]

Seriously does anyone think Marvel wouldn't notice that sort of"mistake"?

Yes, yes we do.
Because they've made mistakes before.
Some writers and editors have a very...relaxed attitude towards things like research and editing as well.
Its plausible that they've screwed up.

[Big Joe]

So, we see people on here say Hickman is meticulous about research because he likes building universes, and yet you think he'd make an error like that? Everyone who has ever read an X-Men comic knows who the original X-Men were, and yet you think editorial would not notice something that big?

Obviously your opinion of Marvel is pretty low, but that sort of "error" wouldn't get past my kids and these guys are professional. I don't care how relaxed an attitude towards research they have, it is not conceivable that something like that is a mistake.

[Big Joe]

The Toad proves it is deliberate anyway. That first appearance is one issue different, that certainly has to be deliberate.

[Omega Alpha]

So, we see people on here say Hickman is meticulous about research because he likes building universes, and yet you think he'd make an error like that? Everyone who has ever read an X-Men comic knows who the original X-Men were, and yet you think editorial would not notice something that big?

Obviously your opinion of Marvel is pretty low, but that sort of "error" wouldn't get past my kids and these guys are professional. I don't care how relaxed an attitude towards research they have, it is not conceivable that something like that is a mistake.

Of course it's conceivable, it's just a typo.

[Big Joe]

Seriously? You think that?

[Omega Alpha]

Seriously? You think that?

These things happen all the time, let alone in a preview page that isn't a part of the issue- just a few months ago, there was Chamber repeating the same sentence in an issue of UXM.

[loke13]

Seriously? You think that?

I mean it's not impossible. Errors and typos happen all the time even in the best most meticulous of works.

[Silver Fang]

Seriously? You think that?

Agreed with Omega Alpha. There's spelling errors, and Jordan D. White, the senior editor made a mistake some months ago when answering a question about Scott. When corrected, he then made a joke that he had to retcon himself.

Oversights happen all the time.
Retcons happen all the time.
And ignoring or being ignorant with continuity happens all the time.

I think it may be deliberate too, but I can agree with Omega that pros make errors too.

[scourge]

So, we see people on here say Hickman is meticulous about research because he likes building universes, and yet you think he'd make an error like that? Everyone who has ever read an X-Men comic knows who the original X-Men were, and yet you think editorial would not notice something that big?

Obviously your opinion of Marvel is pretty low, but that sort of "error" wouldn't get past my kids and these guys are professional. I don't care how relaxed an attitude towards research they have, it is not conceivable that something like that is a mistake.

Obviously you have too high an opinion of Hickman.

Yes, I think Hickman can make such a mistake. His calling X-men continuity “Random Unconnected Gibberish” didn't exactly build confidence in his abilities which I already didn't consider that good after reading his past stuff.
Being a professional doesn't make them perfect or really indicate the quality of someone's work or skill anyway. And like I said, Marvel has screwed up things before and had to reprint and such. You'd be hard pressed to find a 'professional' comic company that hasn't made mistakes like this before.

[loke13]

Obviously you have too high an opinion of Hickman.

Yes, I think Hickman can make such a mistake. His calling X-men continuity “Random Unconnected Gibberish” didn't exactly build confidence in his abilities which I already didn't consider that good after reading his past stuff.
Being a professional doesn't make them perfect or really indicate the quality of someone's work or skill anyway. And like I said, Marvel has screwed up things before and had to reprint and such. You'd be hard pressed to find a 'professional' comic company that hasn't made mistakes like this before.

I mean it's hyperbole but he's not wrong. X-Men continuity is a convoluted, contradictory mess more often then not.

[Omega Alpha]

I mean it's hyperbole but he's not wrong. X-Men continuity is a convoluted, contradictory mess more often then not.

Yeah, anyone that reads the book for a long time knows that.

[hawkeyefan]

I mean it's hyperbole but he's not wrong. X-Men continuity is a convoluted, contradictory mess more often then not.

It was also meant as a joke. He’s really sarcastic on twitter. I think it was just a case of him making a point but making a joke of it.

As for the incorrect info on the cast entries...although I suppose they could be intentional and indicate some kind of time shenanigans, my guess is that they’re just typos. Someone got a little sloppy with cutting and pasting. I’m sure Hickman didn’t write that page...probably a low level member of the editorial team.