Talk: Cable

Nathan Summers/ Nathaniel Grey

This is a small problem with a quick answer, I'm sure, but on the Cable page, why is Nate Grey listed under "other"? He is clearly an alternate version of Cable and I believe that he should be in the "alternate" category. I understand that he has a different mother and that he was "birthed" under different circumstances, but not every alternate version is the same for anyone. There are alternate versions of Tony Stark where he is a woman and they are under "alternate" instead of "other". He is clearly an alternate version and it has pretty much been said a lot. Blaquesmith has said that they are genetically the same person and Mr. Sinister has told us that Nate is the creation that he originally attempted to make, had Apocalypse not infected his with the Techno-Organic Virus. I'm willing to change it, but I want others' opinion first. Thanks.

--Wazzirving 21:46, January 10, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Nate Grey

Unless I'm mistaken, they aren't strictly alternate counterparts. I want to say I've read somewhere that it was specifically stated they weren't (though I can't recall where I read that, so feel free to ignore it), but there's also the fact that they don't have the same parents. They have the same genes, but wouldn't the presence of different parents make them different characters? And, therefore, aren't all of the X-Man counterparts different from the Cable counterparts? --GrnMarvl14 21:57, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

I understand that they are not exactly the same person, but no one in the "alternate" category is. Jean Grey-Summers has different last names and I'm sure that the female Tony Stark is not genetically the same as her mainstream counterpart, but they, Nate and Nathan, do have the same D.N.A.; I've read that myself. The few alternate versions we have of Nate are simply our Nate, the one that came from the Age of Apocalypse and was sent to mainstream, in different scenarios. I believe that a true separate character would exist in his own alternate world. There should not be two versions of you, only one. In the Age of Apocalypse, Nate was the son of Jean and Scott, he then came to someone else's world and then the different reality versions began. What I'm saying is that on everyone else's "alternate reality", they don't arrive from somewhere else and then start their story, so I believe that he is a counter-part of Cable.

--Wazzirving 22:10, January 10, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Well, with last names, that's simply a change in names. It's like saying two characters aren't the same because they use different aliases. Marriage doesn't change a character, but who you come from DOES. Gender's a better example, and honestly, I've never understood why she was there. And just because he came to the same reality doesn't mean he's the same character. Again, it's the difference in parents. The genes may be the same (or similar), but the lineage is different.

--GrnMarvl14 22:49, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Seems there's no moving you on the subject, but I don't think that your parents would make a difference, considering that they are, genetically, the same person. Although, I do agree that the last name thing was a bad example.

--Wazzirving 22:59, January 10, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Here's a simple point: Are Jean Grey and Madelyne Pryor the same person?

--GrnMarvl14 23:32, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

No sir, they are not, but neither is Scotius Suerisle the same as Scott Summers, or Roberto Trefusis the same as Robert Drake, or Werner the same as Warren Worthington III. They have the same powers, different parents, origins, and upbringing, but yet they are categorized as "alternate" versions.

--Wazzirving 23:54, January 10, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Sorry, not much I can say that hasn't already been said.. Or maybe there is.. has there been a universe where both were in with no explanation for it? --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 01:19, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

None that I know of, which would lead me to believe that they are the same person. Scott has had children with other women and they don't turn-out with the same genetic material. Rachel was born a woman and in a certain reality, he and Emma had a girl with optic blasts, not a boy that was named Nate, had anything to do with Mr. Sinister, or had telepathy and telekinesis on a major scale (well, Rachel, but she's a girl). The narrator even christened him Nathan Summers in X-Men Omega #1 on page 15 2nd panel.

--Wazzirving 01:48, January 11, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

I don't know... It seems to me X-Man was created by being based off of Cable, but no a direct alternate, as Jeph Loeb probably didn't want the exact same as Cable. And he really couldn't have made another Cable anyway, it wouldn't have made sense in the AoA. --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 02:04, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Well, with 1602, that's a whole different can of worms (though, like the female Iron Man, I'm wary of calling them counterparts as well). But that's more different interpretations of the same character, rather than two characters with similar genes. I'd consider X-Man and Cable to be more along the lines of brothers than alternate universe counterparts.

--GrnMarvl14 02:19, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the lateness in weighing in. I had a similar concern about Gambit/Remy LeBeau when I first got here on the site. The explanation I got, while a little frustrating, makes sense the more you think about it. Although Nate Grey is a clone of Nathan Summers, he is not "Cable". He is not a mutant messiah come back in time to stop Apocalypse. He is not the time lost son of Scott and Jean raised to be a soldier. He is the son of a clone. He is closer in his origins to Stryfe than Cable.

Check out the Gambit page for the examples that threw me off: New Sun and Witness. Both of them are Remy LeBeau, but neither of them are Gambit. My two cents might not sway things much, but I think this is a case where Nate Grey belongs as a "Cable Related" rather than a Alternate.

Also, the Forever version of Cable (Earth-161) should be in the Alternates.

Artful Dodger 02:37, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I consider the two of them different interpretations of the same character as well. Also, they have never existed in the same dimension (unless it was Nate coming from AoA) and Scott has had children with other women and they don't turn-out with the same genetic material. Rachel was born a woman and in a certain reality, he and Emma had a girl with optic blasts, not a boy that was named Nate, had anything to do with Mr. Sinister, or had telepathy and telekinesis on a major scale (well, Rachel, but she's a girl). Rachel was even born from a "clone" of Jean Grey and doesn't resembled Cable. The narrator even christened him Nathan Summers in X-Men Omega #1 on page 15 2nd panel. I seemed to be the only one that thinks this way. Thank you for giving me the time-of-day on the subject.

--Wazzirving 02:41, January 11, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

What you're missing is that the difference between Rachel and Ruby is that Sinister wasn't involved in their creation. He was with X-Man and Cable, but in two different ways (directly with X-Man, more indirectly with Cable). And, again, gender automatically makes them different. We've also seen realities where Nathan didn't become Cable (Earth-161, X-Factor Forever), but he's still clearly an alternate counterpart to 616's Cable. Because, again, same lineage.

--GrnMarvl14 02:51, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I actually see that difference, or similarity, and because of it, I believe that they are different from Scott's alternate reality children. To me, if Scott has a kid with a Jean affiliate, it's a boy, Mr. Sinister had a hand in it, the kid's eye glows, and it has a tremendous amount of telekinesis and telepathy, then it's a Cable. I was reacting to your comment about them not being the same because of different parents by saying that different women didn't give Scott a Cable lookalike in those two cases. Furthermore, why is New Sun and Witness not under "alternates"? They are the same person in an "alternate" reality.

--Wazzirving 03:26, January 11, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Unless I'm mistaken, I was arguing for New Son/Sun and Witness to be listed as alternate counterparts at one point since, as far as we know, they come from the same genetic stock (I know I did for Witness, at the least). And just because X-Man and Cable have similar origins doesn't mean they're, necessarily, the same character. Again, Jean and Madelyne come to mind, or to get REALLY general, there's Scott and Alex. Same parents, after all. Seeming involvement from Sinister (he's supposedly been watching the Summers for quite a while). Yes, this is extremely general and clearly they aren't the same being, but that's my point. Just because they have similar genes doesn't mean they're, necessarily, the same being.

--GrnMarvl14 03:52, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

It is my belief that Nate Grey is the Age of Apocalypse version of Cable. Scott was raised by Sinister, the X-Men were started by Magneto, and Sinister got to make Cable the way he wanted. That is not another character all together to me, it is simply a different version of the same person. He even had the same name originally. We have Scotius Suerisle as alternate Scott Summers, or Roberto Trefusis as alternate Robert Drake, or Werner as alternate Warren Worthington III. They have the same powers, different parents, origins, and upbringing, but yet they are categorized as "alternate" versions. We also have New Sun and Witness as "others" on the Gambit page. I just think that those are discrepancies.

--Wazzirving 04:43, January 11, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

...on a side-note, I believe we should have a separate page for Mother Askani and Rachel Summers like all of the Nathaniel Richards (Earth-6311)

The answer is simple enough, Nate Grey was never called Cable (yet). So he's not an alternate universe variation of Cable. He might be, one day in the future, and he certainly has the potential, but these disambiguation pages are for the title of the page. The title says "Cable", so the alternates should only be Cables, not even Nathan Summerses. Those should really go in Related, since they never really went by Cable. Nate Grey could really be in Related or Other, but isn't a 'Cable'.

— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • contribs • email) 19:19, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to your one paragraph of input, I'm sold. That actually makes a lot of sense, instead of us arguing over what Marvel should and shouldn't have recognized. Thank you and now you see why I want to be you when I grow up.

--Wazzirving 19:29, January 23, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

This debate has been going on before... to a certain degree. I do agree that by intention of the authors Nate is certainly an alternate version. But going by the handbooks, he's just the "alternate timeline half-brother" - gotta love that term. ;)--edkaufman (talk) 10:07, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

New Mutants #28, Dani Moonstar says, "Nate is...Okay, Cable and Nate are the same person, but from Different dimensions." I know that she is not an expert, but that is pretty much what I've been saying all along. Nate Grey should be the Earth-295 version of Nathan Summers. In X-Men Omega #1, he was even named Nathan Summers. I know no one will agree, but I will just wait for an expert, such as Professor X or Beast to say it, because Dani Moonstar and Blaquesmith obviously don't know what they're talking about, when they say that Nate and Nathan are the same people in different versions. The only person I still agree with is GrnMarvl14, and it's only on one point, that they do not have the same parents. Technically, Madelyne Pryor-Summers and Jean Grey-Summers are not the same person and wouldn't be considered alternate versions of each other, so I can recognize only that difference.

--Wazzirving 06:07, July 28, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Well yes, as you mentioned the different mothers issue. Also, Nate is technichally his name according to the handbooks, I believe. There's probably a reference on his page even.. Still. X-Man was made as the Cable of 295, but that doesn't mean they are exact counterparts. X-Man is merely..a homage to Cable perhaps, but not entirely identical. I don't think it'll ever be safe to say they are the exact same people just from different realities. But maybe that last part is just my opinion.. --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 03:44, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

Honestly, how many other alternate reality versions of a character aren't exactly the same? Some of them don't have the same genders, some have different parents, some have different names, but we still allow it. The problem I seem to be having is that I am the prosecution and not the defense. I seem to be tasked with proving, beyond a shadow of doubt, that they are the same, because it was decided already that he wasn't. I believe that this is simply something that we over-looked, not considered. Saying that, fully aware that the subject has come-up before, but I'm not sure if all of the facts were shown, when the original decision was made.

--Wazzirving 04:12, July 29, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Let's see if we can get an inside Marvel look. I've asked Tom Brevoort. Just curious to see his reponse. --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 04:23, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

Jeph Loeb was the one who originally called him Nathan Summers in in X-Men Omega #1 on page 15 2nd panel, but I understand the Handbooks are the bible and any help from a higher-up is appreciated. Thanks for understanding my sincerity.

--Wazzirving 04:49, July 29, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Maybe I wasn't specific enough. --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 15:44, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

For the sake of an easy explanation (what Moonstar was going for), they are the same person. Let's be honest, if someone who had no idea who X-Man was, you'd say they were an alternate counterpart, just to make things easy on the person. You wouldn't go into the different lineage, the different creation processes, etc. You'd just say they were counterparts and leave it at that. That's what she was doing. Just a simplification of the whole headache-causing mess. Like trying to explain the whole Kang/Immortus/Iron Lad/Scarlet Centurion/Rama-Tut thing. You'd just say they were the same person, but that's an oversimplification, especially given the physical split of Kang and Immortus in Avengers Forever.

--GrnMarvl14 14:50, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

So, Johnnybravo44, where does that leave us? I believe that, like GrnMarvl14 said, in his simplest form, he is a counterpart. When one opens his page, then they understand the differences. That does not go against what Tom Brevoort said, either. I feel like I was right on this one. Nate should be listed as a Earth-295 counterpart on the "Cable" and "Nathan Summers" discomb page and, only because he's been operating in the Earth-616 universe, when listed on the Summers' family, he should be considered an "paternal alternate reality half-brother". Much like Rachel Summers. If she never came to the Earth-616 universe, we wouldn't list her as anything, but she is Cable's "paternal alternate reality half-sister". The argument I was making WAS about the simplicity of the matter. I was saying that we never dissected the other alternate reality's to consider them either "half-brothers" or different people all together, when they showed differences in their origins. I honestly believe that is what makes some of them unique realities. In some instances, it is a simple act that separated them Ex: Earth-811 from Earth-616, but others, it was a number of different acts Ex: Earth-311 from Earth-616. If we don't put these alternate reality beings under a glass, why was Nate so different?

--Wazzirving 16:28, July 29, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

There's a big difference between how you list someone as a relative (X-Man and Cable are, technically, "alternate reality half-brothers", something we CAN list on their pages because they've actually met and both consider Earth-616 Cyclops to be a father or surrogate father, similar to Rachel's relationship with him) and how you officially define someone. Could X-Man be on the Cable page? Sure. Using the "Related1" field, it would be perfect. But not the Alternate field, because they, strictly, AREN'T alternate reality versions of each other. There's nothing wrong with listing X-Man on the Cable page, it just shouldn't be as an alternate counterpart, but as a related character. Similar to how we'd treat a clone (which, considering X-Man's a genetically engineered creation...isn't far off).

--GrnMarvl14 16:58, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

"Tom Brevoort

He's a counterpart, but not exact, in that he was never infected with the Techno-Organic virus, never was raised in the future and didn't have portions of his body replaced by bionics, and never trained as a soldier."

Line 1 states he is a counterpart.

"coun·ter·part [koun-ter-pahrt] –noun 1. a person or thing closely resembling another, especially in function"

Is there a definite definition for "alternate reality counterpart" that you feel Nate doesn't meet? Please don't think I'm insulting your intelligence, but I think we're seeing two completely similar views with no common ground. No, he is not exactly like Cable. Yes, he is an alternate reality half-brother, but is Antonio Stark exactly the same as Anthony Stark? Is Natasha Stark exactly the same as Anthony Stark? Is Scotius Sumerisle exactly the same as Scott Summers? No, they are not exactly the same. Antonio doesn't even share Tony's name, but he is listed as an alternate reality counterpart. Yes, Stryfe is a clone and Nate was grown in a test tube with another mother, but he was not cloned from a prime subject. He was the prime objective and so was Cable. Sinister wanted to make a superior mutant to over-throw his boss in both realities. There was never a need to clone Nate, because he was never infected. There was never a Madelyne Pryor, because Jean Grey never died before he got her cell samples. The only reason he didn't have them mate naturally, was because A.) He was a Horseman and could do as he pleased and B.) Jean and Scott were fighting on different sides. If he was cloned, that would be an alternate of Stryfe. Essex was trying to make a superior mutant and, because of a series of differences, Nate is what we got. Basically, what I'm saying is, he wanted to make a Cable, therefore, I believe he is an alternate take on Cable. A "what if Sinister tried to make Cable when Apocalypse took over North America", instead of the nature Earth-616 version.

--Wazzirving 18:04, July 29, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

What exactly do you want? Include all Nate's counterparts on Cable's page? Why? Nate is already mentioned on Cable's page in "Related" section. If someone is looking for Nate Grey, he goes on Nate's page. If someone is looking for Cable, he goes on Cable's page. Each of them has their own personality, their own story, their own counterparts, so they are not the same person. (For example: Red Queen traveled between realities in the search for Nate's counterparts, not Cable's). I don't understand why Nate should be include as Cable's counterpart, I think it would be just more confusion. --Harasar 18:43, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

"Counterpart" does not, necessarily, mean "alternate reality counterpart" as in, the same person, only in a different reality. Prototype, for instance, is the Ultraverse counterpart to Iron Man. Hyperion or Sentry are Marvel Universe counterparts to Superman...but they are not, in fact, Superman or some new iteration of Kal-El/Clark Kent. Nor are Hyperion and Sentry alternate versions of each other.

As for Antonio Stark...it IS the same name, just a variation based on language. Like if he was named John in one reality and Juan in another. Same name, just a different nationality. And, as far as Stryfe is concerned, he was grown in a lab to serve a specific purpose: To replace Cable and kill Apocalypse, as they worried the TO virus would kill Cable. Both created in a lab to kill Apocalypse. Their stories differed after that because Nate escaped and Stryfe was captured.

Another example of two similar characters who aren't counterparts would be Benjamin Reilly (Earth-616) and Jessica Drew (Spider-Clone) (Earth-1610), or Peter Parker (Scorpion) (Earth-1610) and Reilly, or even Benjamin Reilly (Earth-616) and Ben Reilly (Earth-1610).

--GrnMarvl14 19:17, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

You know, Harasar does have a point. Whether they are or are not the same person, putting Nate's counterparts on his page would create a lot of confusion with the counterparts. I realize that Nate is mentioned in "Related", but I believe that he is an alternate. Now, for someone who cleans-up the alternate category a lot, I can see how that would become a problem. The point now, is moot. I could get everyone to agree with me, but the page would suffer. I still believe that he is an alternate, because all of his alternates consist of him starting in Earth-295, then coming to Earth-616 and then, because of a series of differences, a new reality emerged. That's kind of like Rachel. Not too many alternates, because they all consist of her coming to Earth-616 first. (I also know that raises the question if she is an alternate of a Earth-616, but that's beside the point) Regardless of how I feel, putting Nate and all of his counterparts on the "Cable" page would confuse the new user more than help, just to sedate my theories of categorizing. Your right Harasar, "If someone is looking for Nate Grey, he goes on Nate's page. If someone is looking for Cable, he goes on Cable's page."

--Wazzirving 21:07, July 29, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving

Kid Cable

This is obviously a different character from his older counterpart (he killed him after all) but he is also technically from earth-616. Does this mean we will need two pages called Nathan Summers (Earth-616)?Scarey2243 (talk) 16:44, January 11, 2019 (UTC)

Cable's first name: Nathan, not Nathaniel

I posted this on the 616 page but realized here may be a better spot for it. (I am inexperienced with wiki editing.)

I include more detail below, but my basic argument is the following: (1) Nathan and Nathaniel are two distinct names, and (2) Cable's name has always been "Nathan" (3) other than a single infographic from 2021.

1. Nathan vs. Nathaniel. These are two separate names, although they are similar. There was a biblical "Nathan", for instance. I can provide links but the first few hits of a simple Google search is all you need. "Nate" can be used as a nickname for both, and occasionally "Nathan" CAN be used as a shortened form of Nathaniel, but...

2. Cable's name as Nathan was never a shortened version of Nathaniel. The evidence is that whenever he was named with his middle and last names included (e.g. Nathan Christopher Charles Summer, Nathan Dayspring Askani'son, etc.) it was "Nathan" everytime. This includes countless introductions over the years, including his first in Uncanny 239, even a business card he had (X-Force 40), and I'm remembering a tombstone too that I could find if needed. In American English it would be very unusual to use a nickname while also using someone's middle and last names. For example, "Don John Trump" or "Joe R. Biden Jr."--it's weird and not done. For multiple characters to do this every single time with Cable, over decades, is astronomically unlikely. Even when Scott and Madelyne were ARGUING over his first name back in Inferno, the argument was about Christopher vs. Nathan...not "Chris" vs. Nathan. They were using the full name. As recently as Cable 11 when he was resurrected on Krakoa, Xavier said "You are reborn, NATHAN Summers."

3. As far as I can tell, there is ONE time he was referenced to as Nathaniel, and that was a 2021 infographic in X-Men Legends 2 created by a David Powell. Now David Powell seems like a super talented guy and it looks like he's got a bright future ahead of him, but according to his LinkedIn he's been at Marvel for three years. So I just think there's a likely chance this one reference as Nathaniel may have been a typo or error that eluded QC. If there is any other time he's called "Nathaniel" I'd be very interested to see it; but even so, I still would chalk it up as an error due to people not being super familiar with Point 1 above.

4. As a final side point, I'm aware he was named after Mr. Sinister (Nathaniel Essex) via psychic suggestion. That being said, this doesn't change any of the above points in any substantive way. It was a psychic suggestion after all, not some explicit "get me on the birth certificate" handshake deal.

So all in all, I think Cable is Nathan Summers and always has been. Nathan Summers is no one. I wanted to get some feedback.

CableMO (talk) 13:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I totally agree. I think the most important thing is that there is no coherent origin for the name "Nathaniel". (1) It is not his legal birth name, that would be "Christopher". And we should not forget that all of his records as "Christopher" were deleted by Sinister. (2) It is not how he was renamed either, since Madelyne was the one who renamed him Nathan and she has never called him Nathaniel. That said, I think it is fine to assume that his name is Nathan Summers, as regularly shown in different comics. BloodyNinja (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I also agree. --1137a (AL) (Earth-1218) (talk) 21:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC)