Talk:Batman

---

An event in this article is a January 12 selected anniversary

---

Archives

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 March 2005 to November 2005
• Archive 2 November 2005 to December 2005

T for Troublemaker

T, you are the only person on this page who is having the following argument: "Batman is Gay". None of us are trying to prove, imply, or otherwise suggest that is the case. What we are trying to show is the impact those allegations had on the evolution of the character and comic books as a whole. At this point, your comments (to me at least) are becoming incredibly distracting; this article was apparantly once considered a good example of what Wikipedia aspires to be, it looks to me like a total mess today. You are constantly using terms you don't seem to understand ("ethical obligation", "moot point", "negligent") and trying to start fights that nobody else is interested in having. You have vandalized this page and forced multiple other editors to make the SAME reversions to your changes to the main page.

Please stop. Half the time it seems like you're actively fighting against the rest of us; the problem is that the OTHER half of the time, it seems like if you'd get on the same page, you'd have a lot of useful info to contribute. Please, take a few days off, then come back and reread the article and what it's trying to say. Nobody -- NOBODY -- here is claiming that Batman is gay.

We all have the same goal here. Again, PLEASE -- take a couple days off, respond to this if you feel the need, but leave the rest alone. Come back, reread everything, and get back in the thick of it. Simnel 23:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

ok, krich point taken, but please, as a good faith favor, keep addresing the issues and DON'T do personal remarks on disscusion pages. You are all welcome to give me all the crap you'd like in my talk page. I don't believe he knows the words he is saying that I don't "seem to understand". An uncivil commentary, by the way. I never thought any of you believe batman is gay. Well, one of the above editors did, but his identity isn't up to me to say.

Simnel is not providing new info and the whole thing goes against wikipedia:civil#examples. I've done this in the past and those comments are not here anymore. And believe or not my point is all info in the article should be very accurate and careful. The people who said the BW & Bg thing were relatively newbies to batman, with no idea of of what was neither on bob kane's mind nor in Jack Schiff, Batman all... (ok this is info would be better eslewhere...to be continued). Please, lets address this issue in my page if you want. (I don't, lesson learned, my mistake)--T for Trouble-maker 06:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Ladies and Gentlemen

I give you: The batmojometer.

File:Batmojometer.jpg

Some points i forgot there:

• Flamebird is Batgirl I's alter ego, Betty Kane.
• Bob Kane said: Kathy Kane is based on his wife
• Bob Kane's widow's name is Elizabeth Sanders Kane, like Batwoman's niece Batgirl I a.k.a. Flamebird a.k.a. Betty Kane.
• Wonder Woman's nemesis Cheetah on Justice League , would be "Bat-mojo in action", 2nd. base at least with the B-man... The good girl, and also the bad one, don't fight ladies, there is enough B-man for all of you!
• There are 12 female Bat-villains only from the 60's TV series.
• I remember various of them got close with Batman...but I ignore the exact datum...Someone?
• I also ignore how many and how close did good bat-chiks got with Batman on that same show.

...And then, some mistakes :S

• I ment the same with "major action" and "major baby-making action"...It's just the silly part of my table, anyways.
• By importance i ment how famous do I consider the character from what I know so far.
• Also Source is a typo, I ment Sources

The sources are right there, just ot prove my point: every 2 years and 5 monts a hot bat-chick is created. I don't think anyone that writes here is thinking so. Although with this table, Batman makes James Bond and Sam Malone look like rookies, hhis is not to prove that batman is not gay; but to prove that the Batwoman & Batgirl point is meaningless. We also have the fact that neither allmighthy editor Jack Schiff nor Bob Kane backed that point. So we have meaningless and Unoficial.

So, from my point of view, that makes two options: either aloud me to write something like "editor Jack Schiff nor Bob Kane backed that point" and "in average, every 2 years and 5 monts a Batman romantic interest have been created since the begining" that with help of a friend i can work out; or you could take down the Batwoman and Batgirl line and move on...But that's just my point of view, if you don't like you can print the whole thing roll the papper and shov...No, just kiding. hahah. If you don't like it you can just laugh abuot my idiotic table. The numbers and names are real, the other is just my interpretations (pointless to argue about wich one is more famous or closer to batman).--T for Trouble-maker 05:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Created by the one, the only, --T-man, the Wise Scarecrow 23:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

WOW. I can't believe this. Maybe... maybe Batman's not gay after all? Dyslexic agnostic 05:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Why didn't you put Superman in this chart? World's Finest #289, March 1983, "The Kryll Way of Dying" by Doug Moench & Adrian Gonzales. Gayest issue ever, with major bat-mojo. [1] Dyslexic agnostic 05:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

... ¬¬ .. I...hate... you...so..much... --T for Trouble-maker 06:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)ps: ...i thought about it...but 'didn't know how to describe their relationship..."one night stand of weakness?"

Did anyone else notice the phallic symbol in the image of Batman used in this article? Just between his legs? 193.201.41.38 10:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

yeeeeeeeeahhhh!! that's to show the ladies a little preview what the b-man is all about when it comes to pleasing them!!!--T-man, the worst "vandal" ever 05:57, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

.

Size

Moving on to new and more important things... Superman is now 35kb, while Batman is 49 kb. Further ideas on reduction? Dyslexic agnostic 08:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

how about?... we develope each section into full articles. And we leave here in only the intros'. (I call intros the few paragraphs that are allways above the summaries, the first section, the ones that you have to edit the whole article if you want to change) Lets say, like 3-4-5 paragraphs depending on the size. Internet newspapper style. Wikipedia main page is also like that. We keep some juicy info with generous links and maybe a picture or two here to catch the reader's attention and we develope the full thing as a sort of "sub-article". Like the Superman page. I dunno, maybe someone would like to throw some more ideas...Maybe a lot of them. I myself, for once, am done in this section, I'll return to work to provide new info on the above sections. I'm all for it. Count me in--T for Trouble-maker 08:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Proper plural of miniseries?

This doesn't quite sound right...

"Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale more recently put their miniseries Batman: The Long Halloween and Batman: Dark Victory in the time period following Year One"

Does anyone know how to pluralize miniseries? Simnel 15:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's like "fish", the same, just understood as plural from the context. Dyslexic agnostic 16:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Turns out I made the question irrelevant :-) Go me. Simnel 16:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Editing 'Evolution of the Concept'

Made the follow changes to the last few paragraphs of this section, starting with the discussion of Dark Knight Returns. My main focus was trying to bring everything back around from 'Telling what happened in the stories' to discussing how they impacted the character.:

• The section spent too much time talking about Comissioner Gordon. Added a link and cut down the text.
• Everything I've heard from the Batman: TAS team -- their commentary and interviews -- suggests that they considered the Tim Burton movie their direct precursor, as far as tone goes. Changed to reflect that.
• Removed a whole bunch of mentions of other stories set in the Year One continuity. Most of it is mentioned in the Year One article. Instead, talk about the fact that 'Year One' books have practically become a subgenere.
• Removed the suggestion that the Batman Begins character was directly taken from Year One. While there are similarities, I don't see it and nothing I've seen or read suggests it, except the fact that Batman Begins is set in... well, his first active year. Not saying it's not the case that the Year One Batman IS the Begins Batman, but the costume, origin, training, etc are all different; please provide a reference before reinserting.
• The Killing Joke paragraph didn't really belong there. (I put it in, I think; I'm learning :-) Again, it's got its own article, and we really need to focus on how these books contributed to Batman's development, not what happened in them.
• Removed the statement that zero hour retcons met with criticism from fans. I don't think there's a single retcon in comics history that wouldn't get that note.
• Changed the Jason Todd statement as well as Zero Hour to a bullet point list of post-Dark Knight important changes. I'm NOT HAPPY with the way it turned out; anyone got a better idea?
• Added in Robin IV's death and Batman's part in Infinite Crisis

I think that's it. Whew! Simnel 16:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Good work. I agree with the Zero Hour criticism removal... better left for the Zero Hour page itself. Dyslexic agnostic 16:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Powers and Abilities

The second paragraph of Powers and Abilities needs serious pruning; it goes into way too much detail about infinite crisis/identity crisis. Also, can anyone source Batman actually having an eidetic memory? The eidetic memory PAGE suggests it comes from the novel Batman: The Stone King; I've never read an actual comic that suggests batman has anything except an amazingly, amazingly good memory. Simnel 16:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't remember where the reference was made, but Alfred did say (or suggest) the eidetic memory at least once. --Pentasyllabic 19:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

One step at a time... okay, chopped this guy too. If we can cut it down by half a K or so ever day, we'll have a good article in only a week or two. Simnel 17:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Statistics

Okay, one more and I'm calling it a night. This section (like MUCH of this article) can use a serious revamp. Here are some questions that need to be answered:

• Why is Nightwing 'previous'? I know the current nightwing is having some issues, but has he broken off ties with Batman entirely? Same question about Catwoman.
• Should Azrael and Robins II and IV get deceased tags?
• Barbara Gordon should probably be changed to Oracle, and should definitely be moved to Previous. Jim Gordon should also go in Previous.
• Is Superman really an affiliation? Hmm, I guess if they get a team-up book, the answer is yes.
• Aliases: The World's Greatest Detective isn't really an alias. Also, I've never heard 'The Creature of the Night' -- anyone got a source? I think Dark Knight should technically be The Dark Knight Detective... which I've never thought sounded quite as good. Also, how about "(With Robin) The Dynamic Duo"?
• Does Alfred belong under relatives?
• I don't have a copy of Son of the Demon, where Batman actually marries and has a kid by Talia... does anyone know the details there? I know that's out of continuity, but so are Terry, Ibn, and Helena...
• Hmm... Earth-Two is by definition pre-crisis, so I think we can change all instances of "Pre-crisis Earth Two to just Earth-Two.
• Powers -- this can be edited down significantly.

Simnel 16:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, made the changes above. I'd still like an answer from someone who's up to date on the current comics as to why Nightwing is listed as previous. Powers still runs longer than it needs to. Also, does it make sense to remove ALL references to the Earth-2 Batman and start a Batman (Earth-2) page? Or is it a neccessary part of the modern character? Simnel 16:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Origin

Well, I guess I lied when I said the last one was it for the night :-) Origin also needs serious revision. Specifically, about six different origin stories are all being mixed and matched; I think we should EITHER: A. Stick entirely to the current cannonical origin, and eliminate everything NOT in the comics; B. Include separate sections on varying origin stories, including Begins, Year One, Batman: TAS, etc. C. Unravel the current one a bit, making sure it is very clear what story comes from where. I'm in favor of A or B; either way, a note at the top saying what we've done is DEFINITELY in order there.Simnel 16:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok...good work, congratulations! But, could you please ilustrate me about Year One?... (it hurts to say I'm not being sarcatic) maybe i'm thinking of something else, but last time I checked Batman: Year One, was part of the cannon. I still don't get my Infinite Crisis books, did they went that far?...Uh, are you saying it because Zero Hour changed Catwoman's past and now she was never a working girl? The whole year one is not cannon because of that? I never thought about it that way. I only erased the Catwoman part from my mind--T for Trouble-maker 19:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

On unravelling the origins, I agree with option B. Keep in mind that we are missing out on the whole Earth-Two Batman storyline (married, retired, had child, got cancer, was killed), and I would ask you to compare the way this is treated in Superman. I found this [2] on the subject so far. Dyslexic agnostic 00:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Dual Identities

Step by step, working through this. What I'm trying to do, as much as possible, is keep this page about the character, not about the stories. It's fine illustrating a point with an example, but there are too many "what happened in this story" moments, taking up room and distracting from the main point. Simnel 16:48, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's important to keep the point that Bruce Wayne, the persona, is not the real Bruce Wayne. I don't recall the issue, but there is a statement he makes saying that Bruce Wayne died with his parents, and that all that was left was Batman, and that's who he truly was. I could dig it up for you if you need a source, but I'm confident in the factuality and think it should play an important part in this area. Eluchil 09:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

New Origin section

Okay, I did a MAJOR cleanup of the Origin section, but it still needs a ton of work. I split it up along similar lines to the Superman page, into a Golden Age and current (post-crisis) section. PLEASE add content -- it's sorely lacking -- but please try to follow these guidelines.

1. We're not trying to tell The Complete Story Of Batman; the section is on his origin. We want major, important details. I included "Criminals are a..." because it's Batman's character note.

2. Focus especially on changes. For example, in the original story Alfred doesn't show up for twenty issues or so.

Here are some questions which need to be answered:

A. Pre-Crisis, Batman caught Joe Chill, who learned who he was then died. But Batman later found out Chill had been hired by someone to kill his parents. Someone who has the details, PLEASE add them all in.

B. Pre-Crisis, where did the Wayne money come from? Thomas' medical practice? I'm pretty sure Wayne Industries didn't exist in the 40s...

C. I took the Philip Wayne thing from an earlier version. I've actually never heard of him before (I don't think) which is saying something. Who is this guy? Is what I wrote accurate?

D. Do we need the third section? It seems kind of pointless, to be honest.

Oh, and my text for those golden age paragraphs blows. PLEASE improve it. Simnel 18:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I rewrote the origin section, adding a bunch of info on the Golden and Silver Age versions of Batman's origin (and rearranging the section headers to reflect as such). Hope this helps. To answer the questions above:

A. Added the details in (the Lew Moxon story from 1956, which far as I can tell, wasn't contradicted/thrown out until "Zero Hour")

B. Don't know; possibly old money? Wayne Industries did exist by the 1950's, IIRC, and played a big role in various 70's stories.

C. Philp Wayne was Bruce's uncle that raised him after his parents' deaths (one Silver Age story also mentions that Philip's housekeeper, Mrs. Chilton, also helped raise Bruce---Mrs. Chilton being [unknown to Bruce IIRC] the mother of Joe Chill). Alfred pre-Crisis wasn't hired at Wayne Manor until sometime after Bruce starts his Batman career.

D. I eliminated the "other media" section; would think the sections that already exist specific to those versions would handle this in better detail. Anthony Dean 02:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

GREAT start on dealing with this outstanding issue of Golden and Silver Age Batman. Dyslexic agnostic 02:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow, great job, Anthony! Okay, two things I'm concerned with. First, article length; at the same time, reading through all your new stuff, there wasn't anything I really saw as superflouous, and unlike many wiki comic editors you didn't fall prey to the temptation to just retell your favorite Batman stories :-) Second concern might erase the first, though; Does the 'evolution of the character' section really fit in at this point? Or can we find some way effectively merge it with the new origin sections? It's hard to believe that this is the same article it was a month ago... it's really starting to look up. By the way, BadBillTucker was redoing the awards sections... does anyone know where his work went? Simnel 09:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Trying to go for NPOV re: the first point and make sure there's info on the Golden and Silver Age versions (since there was a bunch of stuff/bias towards the current versions of Bats in a lot of the earlier descriptions it seemed). Re: the second point, guess the two sections could be merged (esp. if it'd cut down on article length). Re: BadBillTucker: Last I checked, I edited out anything that wasn't an award specifically *won*---given the huge number of fan awards and nominees for such, think listing nominees is pointless/cluttering (plus, half the stuff he listed on this and the other comics pages are anything *but* "top votegetters" when I checked up on it, not to mention that the phrase "top votegetter" sounds deceptive/confusing [as if it *had* won])... Anthony Dean 17:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmph... I asked him to write something in the Talk section to avoid exactly this. He had said he was going to fix that up... oh well.Simnel 21:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

It would be great to have the following pictures for the new origin sections:

Either the "Criminals are a superstitious, cowardly lot" panel or the one at the end of the page, the first picture of Batman in his costume, for the Golden Age section.

One of Frank Miller's Year One covers for the Current Continuity section.

Simnel 18:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection

I've looked at the history of this page, and the contributions from anonymous editors seem substantial. I have not found any effort to discuss the recent versions that have been reverted. Semi-protection is a drastic step. I'm hoping some dialogue can happen first, and it won't be necessary. -- Samuel Wantman 11:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that this is what is happening. An anonymous user makes bad changes and doesn't put anything on the talk page. One of the regular editors or someone passing by reverts. Most of the time, the regular editors will either flag the revert with an invitation to the talk page, or mention someone on the talk page itself. The next day, those changes are resubmitted from a different IP address. In the end, it's just an irritation; but it's happening over and over again, people are losing work because legitimate updates are getting stamped out, and maybe this is just me... but it's a fatiguing issue. It makes me want to stop bothering. We've had some VERY productive discussions here, and resolved some difficult issues to the betterment of the page... but if people don't want to talk, there's no real way to make them. Simnel 16:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the vandalism is anything on the scale to merit semi-protection either. We have to remember Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. I can't see anyone removing the material and placing it here for discussion, which is the preferred step to take. Pointing someone to the talk page is all well and good, but if the reverter isn't discussing their actions here there's no real onus on the anon to. Don't get discouraged though, there's a lot of good work here. Steve block talk 18:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I, as well as most of the people here on a regular basis, seem to be discussing changes made on this page, and will at least note why a revert is happening on the history page. Simnel 16:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

You are quite correct, I apologise. Steve block talk 17:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Nothing at all to apologize about. On a related note, I am starting to get really, really irritated at whoever keeps reinserting the text which begins 'Actually, Batman is not a schizophrenic...' I guess I'll leave a message at the IP addess, but it keeps changing... Simnel 01:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Simnel, I recently sent you a message; please reply. Why is it that "Bartgirl I/Oracle" under "previous alliances" has been changed to simply "Oracle", while we allow for Dick Grayson to be listed as "Robin I/Nightwing"? --Ace ETP 19:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Because I got bored of fighting you with these changes, and said 'screw it' after I changed Oracle back. I'm glad you're finally talking about it. Please read my earlier comments about why I made the change in the first place, and comment on that. Simnel 16:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Okay, my bad... it looks like my 'earlier comments' are not on this page. So -- to recap. My main point was that we don't need to list every possible bit of information about these characters, especially when we're providing a link to their own page. I think we've all done a great job of cleaning up this article in the last few weeks, but the size is creeping back up, and the second screen -- where all you see is the stats panel on the right and the TOC on the left, with no text or other information in the middle -- looks utterly, utterly awful. We need to pare everything down as much as possible, and I don't think "Batgirl I/Oracle" or "Robin I/Nightwing" provides additional useful information to a reader, especially when we give more detail both on this page and on Nightwing's own page. I mean, if he had been affiliated with Kitty Pride, would you want to write "Ariel/Sprite/Shadowcat"? If anything, I personally would prefer to use "Civilian name (Superhero name)" rather than two different superhero identities. Counterargument? What's everyone else's opinion? Simnel 01:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

My current opinion is a compromise between my old one and your point...You're right, since we're providing links to the articles about the heroes good ol' Bruce is associated with, there's no need to list all of their numerous alter-egos, especially when practically all heroes (and not just the famous examples like Dick Grayson) have assumed a seconf crime-fighting identity at one time or another (e.g.: Cassandra Cain's tenure as "Kasumi" with the Justice League Elite team, Helena Bertinelli's brief career as the second Batgirl, etc.). Therefore I agree it would be best if we changed stuff like "Robin I/Nightwing" and "Spoiler/Robin IV" to simply "Nightwing" and "Spoiler". I was also thinking that the Roman numerals identifying the particular incarnations of the characters could remain (as in "Robin III"), but as you've just mentioned, maybe the "Civilian name (Superhero name)" option would be best, as in "Robin (Tim Drake)", but it has one disadvantage that detracts from it considerably: it is even longer than the "slash" option. A simple "II" seems better than a huge "(Jean-Paul Valley)". However, whatever option we choose, there's still the touchy subject regarding Barbara Gordon (should she go as "Batgirl (Barbara Gordon)", "Oracle" or "Barbara Gordon"?, encompassing everything) and Dick Grayson (since Superman and a guy from Kandor fought crime as Nightwing before Dick in Pre-Crisis continuity, and due to DC not confirmingif Dick will still be Nightwing after Infinite Crisis.) --Ace ETP 05:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Simnel, I changed "Robin I/Nightwing" and "Spoiler/Robin IV" to simply "Nightwing" and "Spoiler". Hope you don't mind. I figured that no matter if we choose either the Roman numerals option or the "Civilian name (Superhero name)" option, it will still be better for the internal consistency of the article if we keep the number of superhero identities listed per character limited to one (as suggested when you listed Babs Gordon simply as "Oracle"). We just have to remember that there will be a new Catwoman after the "One Year Later..." event in Infinite Crisis (since Selina Kyle will be pregnant. If Bruce is the father, this might bring Helena Wayne to mainstream continuity), and that there might be a new Nightwing. --Ace ETP 02:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Past tense

It occurs to me when looking at a recent anonymous edit that the article should be written in past tense as much as possible, and should avoid the use of words like 'recently'. I'm going to try to clean it up a bit, and we should all keep it in mind going forward. Simnel 16:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the contrary applies, see Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles, where the following guidance is given: Works of fiction are generally considered to exist in a kind of perpetual present tense, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to "now". Write about fiction using the present tense, not the past tense. To avoid the term recently, see Wikipedia:Avoid statements that will date quickly. I think the best option to take is to specify an issue, which would allow for better dating. Steve block talk 18:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Steve! I did intend to mean 'when talking about real-world vs. comic book events'... IE, we shouldn't talk about the War Games storyline as being recent, as in three years that won't be the case. We shouldn't even talk about Infinite Crisis as recent, for the same reason. But thanks for the policy links -- I didn't know that, and it's really interesting! Simnel 01:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

External links

I've been cleaning out the external links section and some keep getting added back in so I figure a rationale is neccesary. There are so many fam pages on the web devoted to Batman that I think it is unfair to choose any one, and we can't list them all, since Wikipedia is not a web directory. Therefore, as per guidance at Wikipedia:External links, I have added a link to an open directory's listing of Batman related pages. Since the site is an open one, it is perhaps better practise that people add their links to that project rather than this one. I also removed a link to a site which appears to violate copyright, as per Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works.

Teen Titans

I cut this text...

In Teen Titans? In the episode of Teen Titans, "Haunted", a shot of Robin taking an oath to be Robin is seen. This would make Batman the only non-Titan hero that has appeared on the show.

It really didn't fit in. Simnel 23:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Other media

I took out this sentence...

Spoofs of the character include Dynomutt, Radioactive Man, Darkwing Duck, Batfink, Rat Pfink, and Saturday Night Live's short films of the Ambiguously Gay Duo.

Dynomutt is not a Batman spoof. Radioactive Man is not either. Nobody has ever heard of Rat Pfink a Boo Boo. Batfink is something Joker calls Batman; I guess it was also a cartoon. The Ambigously Gay Duo does belong here... but it might go better in the homosexual section. What would go GREAT instead of this would be a discussion of some of the high-quality fan projects out there, like Sandy Collura's Batman: Dead End, World's Finest... I think someone does a Batman radio (web radio) drama... some of that stuff, that really shows how the character has seeped into the culture.

I also changed a 2nd Marvel reference to an Image reference; seemed like a better way to do things. What might go better is a paragraph talking about how Batman is now a common 'type' for comic books and many companies have made characters which draw in at least some way on him. Simnel 23:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Simnel, in the above context, see Batman: Dead End and World's Finest (movie) (the latter I created in December). Love those, and Grayson too! Dyslexic agnostic 10:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Relatives / Children in and out of Continuity

I saw that 86.41.196.255 added Terry McGuinness from Batman Beyond as a relative. Not knowing if out-of-continuity offspring should be shown here, I searched for his other son, Ibn al Xu'ffasch from the Kingdom Come universe. He is listed as Ra's al Ghul's grandson (with the out-of-continuity notation), so I included him here as well. Couldn't find debate on the topic, but it seems to be common to note such relatives elsewhere. ZZ 13:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, on that note -- I included the fact that Ibn is in the Kingdom Come continuity, fixed the link to the Batman Beyond page for Terry, and included Huntress I from Earth-Two. Simnel 14:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I guess that's why I couldn't find an existing page for Terry. Good catch. ZZ 15:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

This question appears to have come up again. I know other Comics articles mention children from out-of-continuity, and adding them here would appear to maintain a consistent format across the various comics articles in the encyclopedia. As there is no listing available in the superherobox template for making that distinction, the logical place to put such offspring is under the actual relatives heading.

Even if characters are related outside of regular continuity, the characters still exist and still have their own articles with their own links and cross-references. So long as the notation is clearly made that such characters are out-of-continuity (as I think the references in question to Ibn al Xu'ffasch and others are), then they should probably be listed here. I'm not going to start reverting back and forth without calling the question, so discuss here.

Also, isn't Helena Wayne also out-of-continuity? ZZ 04:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I reverted, but invited the editor who made these changes to come and discuss. We'll see what happens. In all likelihood, it'll be yet another interminable revert war... fun. We'll see. Simnel 04:22, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

There's no use in discussing the subject in "Batman article". Let's make it general. Please add your opinions in here: WikiProject Comics Discussion: Elseworlds in the SHB. Lesfer 14:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I added

However, quotes from the crators would be missing and Batman had previous romantic interests prior to this point [3].

is more sourcing needed? I won't change the section any further than that.

If the creators part isn't aloud I'd need to see Christopher York's sources. We could rephrase "Althoug he didn't quote the creators".

Does anybody saw the "Legends of the Dark knight" ep. of TNBA? there is also a gay reference there.

--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 01:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

t-man as you are here could you please add your statment here

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_T-Man.2C_the_Wise_Scarecrow

Benon 01:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

T-Man, I hate to revert you, especially given that we are apparently going to arbitration and all, but your addition is contrary to the consensus that tooks many weeks to build on this area, and which you left alone until now. You still seem to be trying to prove that Batman is not gay... we all know this. Here is your addition:

However, quotes from the creators of the characters would be missing yet, and Batman had previous romantic interests prior to this point [4]

Firstly, the comment is not too encyclopedic. Secondly, no one said that there are quotes from the creators; what was said was that "it has been suggested that" the creators did this in response to the Wertham allegations. This is logical to conclude. As well, your web citation is not very useful in addressing this issue, although it does seem useful to show the dates the various characters were first introduced, and can be put into Batgirl and other sites (in fact, is already there).

I am going to be very civil with you from now on. But that doesn't mean I don't have great concerns about these edits, particularly when they address the same issue month anfter month with no flexibility. Dyslexic agnostic 01:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

From this website:

Enter Batwoman

This character made her debut in Detective Comics #233 (July 1956), written by Edmond Hamilton and illustrated by Sheldon Moldoff. It seems clear that her introduction was part of a publishing decision to alter the ambiance of the series. Memories are vague on this point, but the responsibility may have rested with DC publisher Harry Donenfeld's son Irwin. After Whitney Ellsworth moved to California to produce a Superman television series, Irwin Donenfeld was serving as de facto editor in chief. "He came in and he had a lot of things that he sort of threw at us," recalled Batman editor Jack Schiff. Then again, Schiff himself believed new characters would bump up sales, and everyone seemed eager to provide Batman with some female companionship.

Dyslexic agnostic 01:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm now it's undertood batman isn't gay. To me Batman gayness is in a sense real. My opinion is exactly Devin Grayson + Alan Grant´s, I believe the creators didn't write a gay Batman, but I can see how some people saw him that way. If you're gay you'd probably relate to some of the 60's show and even to the comics' features. The duo was intended to be straight but they did look ambiguos. That's how probbably Joel's Batman, and that's part of why most people hate his Batman. I just needed to see evidence of dc trying to introduce those female characters as a direct consecuense of wertham. Even if they wanted a female character, there were already like 8 female characters created previously. two of them not being obscure as Batwoman: Selina Kyle and Vicky Vale. To me it's just about following logic. The ambiance alteration still doesn't make any reference to wertham. my pov on that (excelent) source work is they wanted the female to be a hero instead of a villain (selina) or another lois lane (vicky), not from gay to striaght. We still need some cause-efect source on Wertham(cause)-Batwoman(effect). I see more of that on Denny O'Neil's changes, he moved R to college and the Titans, and put batman in bed with talia. However, that second ambiance change is still not necessary because of gay thing, yet. In the 50s ans 60s ralating to a hero through the sidekick kid was considered the cool thing. In the 70s the sidekick getting some with a 1.90 barely dressed hot alien at College and Batman in an appartment with the daughter of his new nemesis WAS the cool thing. So it's a matter of perspectives, but as long as we source, and especially from the straight (didn't mean heteresexual) source. --T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 04:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I also wonder if it'd be better if we just leave the link of the Enemies of batman erasing the intro here... That might enphacize the page as a sub-article. Or maybe a copy of the first lines there with a "read more" kind of link. like they do on www.allmusic.com--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 05:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

great looking article

This is a great looking article why can't this be done for a Canadian article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.150.48.217 (talk • contribs) .

Because Canada is...nah, too easy. :P Actually, there's nothing stopping the Canadian version, or any other version of the arcticle to be as well groomed or polished. You just have to do it, basically. Eluchil 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Batman Family

Apostrophe -- I reverted your change, not because I thought it was bad but because I wasn't quite sure why you did it, and wanted a chance to talk about it. I personally don't like just linking to 'Batman family' as much; I think it takes some of the most key information out of the superhero box and redirects the user to a page that isn't as good. More than that, the summary itself doesn't have a whole lot of value; what I mean is, if we listed "Robin I, Robin II, Robin III, Robin IV" reducing that to something like 'various Robins' keeps the spirit there. 'Batman Family' gives the reader no information unless they decide to follow the link and read the article. Just as importantly, the superherobox is already an oversized monstrosity. Reducing it by two lines makes no noticeable difference. Anyway, like I said, wanted to talk about it; what made you decide to make the change? Simnel 09:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Because I felt that it was simply too cluttered, and that and possible summarization would be preferred. I don't have a strong opinion either way; the only things I particularly care for are the absurd Roman numberals (they are never called "Robin III" or any other nonsense like that in the fiction) and grammar-violating capitalization of "the". As it seems that you aren't concerned about those, I'll change them while leaving the alliances part alone. ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 21:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I've always disliked 'Robin III'... I mean, come on, even if you were talking to someone and SAID Robin III, it doesn't clear anything up, you still need to mention that you're talking about Tim Drake. It's made even MORE absurd when talking about someone whose famous incarnation is not the first one. (Azrael II) I heartily support this, although group decision definitely has a role here. Simnel 00:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I HATE the first screen

The first screen of the page, to me, looks terrible. On my monitor, I see 1/4 of the SHB -- including a picture which is too large to fully show -- 1/3 of the table of contents, two redirect notices, white space between the TOC and the SHB, and two paragraphs of text. Here are some suggestions:

• Kill the 'The Batman' redirect notice. If that means we set The Batman to go to the cartoon, fine. I can't imagine ANYONE... EVER... searching for 'THE BATMAN' when looking for this page. Even when something requires the definite article, people will leave it off -- if I was searching for Barnum & Bailey, that's what I'd look for, not The Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus.

EDIT: I clipped this:

"The Batman" redirects here; for the TV series, see The Batman (TV series).

because the disambiguation page, referenced immediately above, already contains this link.

• Does the TOC auto-format? I already changed two section titles to shrink the TOC width; there should be room now to put text in that whitespace. Alternately, do we have the ability to move it below the SHB?
• Slightly crop the picture, shrink it, or just find a (just stating a pov here) better one. Perhaps one by an artist familiar with human anatomy.
• If philanthropist is going to link, so should playboy and industrialist. (actually, I just did this.) Playboy should (for obvious reasons; do the search) link to the Wiktionary article rather than Wikipedia.

I'm out of ideas here. If anyone's got anything to add, please do. If you decide to make any changes, just talk about them here. Simnel 10:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Protection

I requested semi-protection again, guys. Hopefully, we'll see less vandalism in the future. If I never see "Batman is actually not a schizophrenic" again, it'll be worth it :-) Simnel 01:38, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked the most recent purveyor of "Batman is actually not a schizophrenic" for a week. I will block any anon who makes the same revert without warning. Let me know when it happens again. The blocks will get progressively longer. I think the problems are related to a single person, and for this reason, I don't think semi-protection is the best route. If I am not around to block the next incarnation, mention the problem at WP:ANI and you should find an admin willing to block on the spot. Point them to my comments here. These are links to the users who have been blocked so far...

• User talk:69.3.101.54 blocked for 24 hours on 23 Jan
• User talk:69.3.101.203 blocked for 48hours on 27 Jan
• User talk:65.113.199.226 blocked for a week, just now. -- Samuel Wantman 07:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Doc Savage and the Spider

Not that I'm doubting either -- I had never heard of the Spider before this, but he certainly seems to be a Batman precursor -- but does anyone have references to Doc Savage or the Spider as inspirations to Kane/Finger? I've only heard Doc come up as a Superman forerunner before. Simnel 14:35, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Superhero/Hero/Fictional Character

When was the first paragraph changed from 'Batman is a superhero' to the significantly less specific 'batman is a fictional character'? And why? Simnel 09:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I can't say when, but it might have something to do with the text at Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Check your fiction. The guidance we settled upon at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars was {Name of character} ({birth name}) is a {Name of comic book company} {superhero/villain/team}. Created by {creator(s)}, he/she/they first appeared in {Name of series} #{issue number} ({year}). Steve block talk 21:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Batman is an anti-hero

To Simnel, Batman is a anti-hero because he is the opposite of traditional superheroes such as Superman. He is willing to use underhanded techinques, his character is very flawed, and he has an obsseive hatred of criminals. being a vigilante also makes him an anti-hero.T-1000 21:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

1. Virtually EVERY superhero is a vigilante. Vigilante, noun (from Webster): : a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily. This applies to every Marvel or DC hero I can think of, aside from Captain America.

2. Spider-Man has a very flawed character. So does Iron Man (alcoholic.) So does virtually every Marvel hero -- the entire marvel UNIVERSE is predicated on the notion that you can have flaws and still be a hero.

3. Define 'underhanded techniques'. Show me something Batman does that Daredevil doesn't, that Spider-Man doesn't, that even Superman hasn't, at one point or another.

4. Hating criminals doesn't make you an anti-hero.

An anti-hero is someone who uses the methods of villains to achieve heroic ends. Punisher is the perfect example. Punisher KILLS PEOPLE. That's an evil act. But he only does it to evil people. Batman may be a dick, but he's the textbook definition of a hero. He sacrifices his own health, happiness, money, etc to make sure other people are safe. Just because he's MEANER than Superman doesn't make him less a hero. Simnel 13:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

You can be both a superhero and an anti-hero at the same time. Anti-heroes include tragic and flawed heroes. T-1000 19:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

• Right, we have a problem here. At Anti-hero, Batman is listed as an example. Vigilante is defined as a type of anti-hero. Daredevil has been cited as an anti-hero on that page since April 2004. I'm not taking looking to take sides in this dispute, but I think there's room for a wider discusion than just on this page. Also note The Guardian have described the character as an anti-hero. Now, I can agree the description is so broad to be meaningless, but let's make sure Wikipedia as a whole is on the same page. If this debate is over categorisation, maybe it's worth investigating the categorisation structure further and identifying a sub-category which could be categorised both in the superhero branch and the anti-hero branch. Steve block talk 20:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

• Batman was very violent in Bob Kane's stories, then he became more ethical during the 50s, but we would have to see if the term anti-hero was used then. Timm Burton and Frank Miller's ROTDK Batman act like anti-heroes. But the Silver age, bronce age, 60s tv series, 70s cartoons, Superfriends, Modern age, Bruce Timm and Batman Begins versions are clearly against any kind of anti-hero like behavior. The cannonical Batman became a dick after Morrison but that's not antiheroic. Personally I don't think he is even unethical, after all, Moore asked Who watched the watchers?, and to me, saying "Batman watches the watchers" is a good answer. So I'm totally with Simmel on this one. Batman is NOT AN ANTI-HERO. Read the crossover Batman/Spawn and you will surely understand the difference.--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 04:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

The campy Batman had more to do with censors than the Character itself.T-1000 05:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Batman has been portrayed in so many different ways that it's impossible to say definitively that he is or is not an anti-hero. I agree that Frank Miller's Batman is clearly an anti-hero — psychotic and unstable, and gaining strength from his psychosis. On the other hand, the Batman of Batman Begins is not, since although he "clearly has issues" he's essentially operating out of a developing sense of justice rather than vengeance. I agree with T-Man that Morrison's Batman is a bit of a dick but a hero nonetheless. I also get the impression that one of the consequences of the new focus on the character after Infinite Crisis will be to downplay Batman's recent assholishness and play up his heroism.

As for the original Bob Kane/Bill Finger Batman, it's true that he was more violent back then, but it's also true that the "rules" for comic-book heroism hadn't been clearly defined yet. Batman owes a lot to pulp figures like The Shadow, who was very much an antihero. But later, as comics came under tighter scrutiny from critics and censors, the character cleaned up his act and became more blatantly heroic.

Because of Batman's pulp roots, there will always be a pull towards the antiheroic side. Aside from the campy "old chum" Batman of the 1950s comics and 1960s TV show, every other version of Batman has at least been a "dark" hero, which is closer to the antihero than the sunny, optimistic Superman. Is Batman an antihero? Well, sometimes he is, and sometimes he isn't. I think that it's probably OK to have him in the antihero category, especially if he's also in a category showing his heroic side as well. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I think a lot of the problem is with people misinterpreting what an antihero is. Just because Batman is an asshole doesn't make him an antihero. Even in Dark Knight Returns, he's a bit more violent than usual -- but he's still clearly a hero, still clearly NOT an antihero. (And he's certainly FAR from psychotic.) I agree with Steve that perhaps the whole concept of what an antihero is needs cleaning up; I think if we used the guidelines put forth on this page and on the Antihero page, the category 'comic book heroes' wouldn't contain a single entry.

Antiheroes are RARE. Punisher is an antihero. Lobo, maybe, is an antihero. But even someone like Wolverine clearly ISN'T one (even though he's often cited as one.) Dick does not equal antihero. Batman is a dick. It doesn't have anything to do with his heroism. Simnel 14:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

No, your definination of Anti-hero is too narrow. Anti-heroes clearly include Dark heroes and tragic heroes, and it is Clear that Batman falls into both category. Ever since the 1980's anti-heroes have been the majority. Traditional heroes such as Superman, Mister Fantastic, and Invisible women are the rare ones now. T-1000 02:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I think you're going to have to provide better backup here, T-1000. Tragic heroes are anti-heroes? Okay, so someone who is the last survivor of a dead race, who lived his whole life never knowing his mother and father, and struggles valiantly to fight a neverending war against crime... he'd be an antihero, right? Simnel 18:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

1. My backup is from the Anti-hero page, which is edited and accepted by millions of Wikipedians world wide. Whatever you believe an anti-hero to be is your own opinion and business, and you are entitled to your flawed opinion, but it should not override what is accepted here. If you want to change the def. of anti-hero, then take it to the anti-hero page.

2. I don't think you really understand what anti-hero means. "Anti" means opposite, so the term means "opposite" to tradition heroes. Being a dick does make Batman an anti-hero, percisely because Superheroes are not suppose to be dicks. Batman is a hero, but he is also an anti-hero because he has qualities that are opposite to traditional heroes. T-1000 04:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

"which is edited and accepted by millions of Wikipedians world wide"? There are less than 500 edits in the Anti-hero history, most by the same set of editors. There aren't even a million users; the chances of all them seeing the anti-hero article is even lower than my checking balance. "Worldwide" is also absurd, as there are various languages beyond English in the world; don't delude yourself into thinking that the majority of English users aren't from America, Australia, or Britain.

Don't exagerrate so wildly; it only makes you look moronic. ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 06:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Simply put, I despise anyone labeling Batman as an anti-hero. You want to know the simple reason he isn't? He doesn't kill. He DOES NOT KILL! He despises guns and refuses to take a life. My God, man, Punisher kills people on a REGULAR basis! Wolverine, the same! Labeling Batman as such is a detriment to this article and a slap in the face to the Batman mythos. - The Dragonmaster 05:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

That's your own opinion, which does not belong on Wikipedia, see NPOV. The Def. of Anti-hero saids different. T-1000 05:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Sub-articles

Maybe it is time to summarize this article, I think it could be more informative. I mean I agree Azrael killing avatoir, or Bane broking batman's back, Quakemaster, or Lex Luthor rebuilding GC are not just details. Sub-Articles are becoming necesary, that was done on Superman's page. Check Wikipedia:Summary Style--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 03:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)