Board Thread:Administrative/@comment-24800939-20171119204541/@comment-4651179-20171119213740

While I do belive it can be confusing to mention every single version of a given event no matter how outdated or abandoned some of said versions have become, I don't have a problem with preseting all of them as long as it's made clear which is the "true" version of events.

For reconciliating differences, I don't think making assumptions or suggestions as to how a person could interpret the discrepancies is entirely wrong, as long as there is room for making such assumptions. To elaborate my point with examples:

Wong-Chu (Tony Stark's captor) was seemingly retconned out of existence in and  and replaced by an adaptation of his MCU equivalent Raza. The intention of both issues' writer (Matt Fraction) was probably to use Raza for the sake of synergy. However, Wong-Chu can't simply be erased from existence considering his role in another (relatively obscure) story beyond Iron Man's origin. Furthermore, Wong-Chu's existence was later reinforced in. If somebody was to elaborate on this discrepancy, a logical and straightforward conclusion can be made: Raza's appearances were both one-panel cameos. He can either be ignored, or it can be assumed Raza and Wong-Chu both worked together, but were never seen on-panel at the same time.

Since I'm much more familiar with Iron Man, my next example also involves his stories. In, it's shown the Mandarin getting his hands on Stark was pretty much a coincidence, to the point he wants Stark dead for all he cares. However, in, the Mandarin has Wong-Chu make of Stark's survival his top priority, since the Mandarin himself had orchestrated Stark's kidnapping to have him study his alien rings. I don't think there's really a way to reconcile this discrepancy that isn't far-fetched, so if somebody were to elaborate in this discrepancy, they shouldn't try to speculate a reconciliation.

As for the apple of discord, there's the retcon involving Reed Richards and Sue Storm's first meeting from. I think this is an extremely peculiar case since the intention behind the retcon is crystal clear. This isn't a discrepancy that stems from a writer's disregard for past continuity, and it even originates from a conscious editorial decision. There is no need to reconcile any discrepancies since the retcon was applied specifically with the purpose to overturn the elements it contradicts. This isn't a case in which the validity of two different accounts of the same event need to be evaluated (like in the Wong-Chu/Raza retcon). There is no room for speculation, Marvel's intention is that Reed and Sue met in the circumstances depicted in Fantastic Four Vol 4 #4 and that's it.