Talk:Bane in other media

Comics: DC Comics / Batman Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Related work groups:
/
	This article is supported by DC Comics work group.
	This article is supported by Batman work group.

Bane (Antonio Diego) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 August 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Bane in other media. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Title

The title of this page is absurd. It should be called "Bane outside comics" or something like that. As a section title, it made sense but as an stand-alone article it does not. Mezigue (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really? Then explain the Joker in other media and Green Goblin in other media articles? 129.49.7.125 (talk) 18:49, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation is the same in all three cases! It's been spun-off from a section in the character's main article. Mezigue (talk) 12:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you attacking the Bane article? Those other articles have existed for YEARS. Osh33m (talk) 02:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "attacking the Bane article" - I am pointing out that its title is unhelpful, as are those of those other pages which I wasn't aware of. Mezigue (talk) 10:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that they are not helpful. Those pages have been serving their purposes successfully for years. 129.49.7.125 (talk) 02:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bane's ambiguous birthplace in The Dark Knight Rises

Bane's place of birth is left ambiguous by time the story for The Dark Knight Rises ends. He was rumored to have been born in a Pit according to Alfred. It's definitively established that another character was born there, a character whose special qualities of being born in hell, forged from suffering, and hardened by pain gave the character the ability to escape. Bane did not ever escape, perhaps because he did not ever have these special qualities, it's not definitive one way or the other; it's used as a form of misdirection by the storytellers. There were at least two pre-release books before the film came out (with misdirection on some subjects), one writer said that said Bane was born in a prison, "Little is known about Bane. He was born in prison and trained in the darkest forms of deception by the League of Shadows" (from The Dark Knight Rises: The Secret Files Scrapbook), the other said his origin was mysterious, "Details surrounding Bane's origins are vague at best." (from The Dark Knight Manual: Tools, Weapons, Vehicles and Documents from the Batcave) Easyjusteasy (talk) 02:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the only thing we know about Bane's birthplace is that it was a prison. He was NOT born in the Pit, this was entirely a misdirection and needs to be stopped from being put into the article. Tom Hardy even said one of the influences for Bane's voice was his comic book heritage, it would not make sense for him to do that if he was born in the Pit because NONE of the other inmates sounded like Bane. Easyjusteasy, you should revert the page asap. Osh33m (talk) 20:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You and I (and hopefully others) understand this, but this one IP address 50.196.193.110 doesn't understand WP:SYN and WP:NOR. Such as "All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to the original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors," or "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources." Finding professional sources that dig into spoilers and analysis about the film's plot (most don't spoil) is important. Even the books I mentioned above are interested in misleading rather than giving a true, comprehensive look at the film's story. Easyjusteasy (talk) 14:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the current wall of shame of people making stuff up that is not in the references and/or deleting references - 1 2 3. Learn WP:OR, live it, and love it here on WP. Easyjusteasy (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nolan tells one big lie about the origin of Bane. That lie is designed to hide the film's biggest reveal, and we do eventually learn the truth about Bane. It seems fitting that in the one flashback where Nolan tells the full truth about Bane's identity, we finally catch that single glimpse of Tom Hardy's face."

You used this source talking about the scene in which Bane was revealed as Talia's protector to state misdirection by the film in the sentence after the one talking about his birthplace, making it look as if the misdirection was related to the birthplace. Your quote doesn't support the sneaky implication of your edit. I'm amazed by the number of people who think that because Talia was born in the Pit, that must mean that Bane wasn't. There's really no RS that even implies this notion. And Osh33m, heritage does not mean "birthplace". ArtistScientist (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's open to interpretation where Bane originated from in the film, unlike Talia. She definitely originated in the Pit. Bane is just subject to Alfred's rumors and Bruce repeating it while in the Pit (PRISONER: A child born in this hell. WAYNE: Bane... (CUT TO SHOT OF CHILD THAT IS LATER REVEALED TO NOT BE BANE)). This is misdirection. There's other examples. There's a load of "nonsense" added in those edits numbered above that does not appear in those sources. It's gotten into fan fiction territory to definitely state what is not said by sources or the film which is ambiguous. Easyjusteasy (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at those edits. They don't make anything up. They only show comprehension of the film. The edits of those like you, on the other hand, introduce notions that are not in your sources. You haven't addressed what I said about your weasel words making it look as if the source says anything about the birthplace. ArtistScientist (talk) 01:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Snider's books (which are very small books intended for very young children, not exactly RS material) say nothing about Bane being born and raised in prison or the Pit. One of his two books says he was born in prison, his other book says his origin is vague. That's it. Any writing to the contrary is exaggeration or fabrication...one that's being sythesized with other stuff. Second, the film itself says Bane is rumored to be born and raised in the Pit according to Alfred. That was his supposed origin story. McWeeny compares it to the multiple-choice backstory that leaves the Joker's origin ambiguous. He says this whole "origin of Bane" business is just there to mask the reveal of the film. What was Bane's origin thought to be before the reveal? Oh, that he originated in the Pit. After all is said and done, where precisely Bane was born isn't addressed by the film, and it's not even important to the writers of said story by the end. Writing fan fiction is fine on some messageboard, but not in the article. Were there multiple pregnant women getting sent to the Pit to give birth at different times? Never addressed in the film's story. Easyjusteasy (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArtistScientist, you completely missed my point. Tom Hardy said one of the things that influenced the way Bane sounds is his Caribbean heritage. Well it would not make sense at all for Tom Hardy to incorporate this if his character was born in an Arab setting. The other inmates (the doctor and the one tending to Bruce) should have sounded exactly the same as Bane, or vice versa; Bane should have had a more Arab/Middle Eastern sounding soundtrack. THIS is what makes it clear that Bane's origin was at a place completely separate from the Pit. Easyjusteasy knows what he's talking about. Osh33m (talk) 03:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, it's possible to have a Caribbean accent and be born in a non-Caribbean country (not that we even know where the Pit is). That's a very weak argument. And yes, Easyjusteasy, before the reveal he was thought to have been born in the Pit. This is not dispelled by the reveal in the film, and you know this. Talia being born there and Bane being born there aren't mutually exclusive. You are using logical fallacies to try to trick people. And don't accuse me of writing fan fiction when at one point you used a source to imply something that wasn't said. I have edited the paragraph so that the reader is not being mislead about the nature of the reveal. ArtistScientist (talk) 03:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Origin of Bane" means the starting point, as far back as implied to be divulged. "Escape" is not an origin. SMH at that edit. Easyjusteasy (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the birth of Bane is divulged? ArtistScientist (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bane was not born in the Pit. I'll have to really dissect this to make you all understand that all we know about Bane's origin is that he was born in a prison.

In one of his attempts to escape the Pit, Bruce exclaims to another prisoner that he said a child did it. And the prisoner responds "not just any child. A child born in hell." So the prisoner is making it sound like a child who was born in the Pit had natural special abilities capable of escaping. Talia had that since she was the child being talked about during the entire film. However, if Bane was indeed born there as well, then as a child he should have had those natural special abilities as well, since would have been "a child born in hell."
All the prisoners seemed to have a Middle Eastern accent. If Bane was born and raised there, he should have sounded like them as well. However, he has an accent of his own. Not only that, but Tom Hardy said that one of the influences for Bane's voice was his CARIBBEAN heritage, and this would not make sense if in the film, Bane was born in the Pit. With all this criteria in mind, it is safe to say Bane was not born in the Pit, but was born in a prison. 129.49.7.125 (talk) 22:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason Talia escaped was because Bane helped her escape, not because of any natural special abilities that you claim, although growing up in the Pit may have helped. Also, the prisoners of the Pit appear to be of various ethnic backgrounds. Bane's accent in the movie is somewhat ambiguous. Sounds more like a combination of Posh British and Gyspy Romani. VasOling (talk) 22:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not according to film lore. A child "born in hell" was a quality described about Talia's apparent ability to escape, make the climb, and get out. Bruce had to work hard to escape the same way. 129.49.7.126 (talk) 03:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're right in a way. Because the child was "born in hell", she had the will or the special drive to escape the Pit, unlike Bruce who was born in privilege. However, if Bane was not there to lift her up, there would be no way she would have made it. Bane may have had the will to escape, but he never had anyone to help him. And the idea of Bane being born in another prison, yet calling the Pit his home seems awfully sketchy. VasOling (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This scene adds even more ambiguity to the thing. Specially, Bane's line (2:40) "You merely adopted dark... I was born in it" That suggested that he was born in the Pit. But then when they they the story about the child who was born in there, and that was actually the only child to be born in there. Too confusing, could be a hole in the plot. Sekkuar (talk) 02:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The prisoners never actually say that there was only one child born there. They were only telling the story of the legendary child who escaped. Talia's story doesn't contradict Bane's comment about being born in the dark. In fact, it compliments it since he said that he didn't see the light till he was a man, meaning that he never reached the surface until later on in his life. -VasOling (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The prisoners never said more than one child was born there either. So we can't go based off what we think. What we know, is that Talia al Ghul is the infamous child born in the Pit, talked about throughout the film's second and third acts. Moreover, the film never explicitly states bane was born in the pit. In one segment he calls the pit "home" where he "learned the truth about despair", but that is in reference to how he was trapped there for a prolonged period of time until the League of Shadows invades it. Osh33m (talk) 23:11, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yet, you're basing you edits off of what you think. The concept of Bane being born in the prison is never dispelled by Talia's reveal. It simply shows the audience that Talia was the legendary child who escaped and that Bane was the legendary protector. Along with the intel found by Alfred stating that he was born in the Pit, Bane even says that he was born in and spent his whole life in "darkness" until he was a man, which is when he was rescued by Ra's al Ghul. And after all that, he takes Batman to the prison in question. It doesn't make any sense for him to be born in another prison or anywhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.156.0.181 (talk) 03:33, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I could say the same about you. What's known: there is discussion in the film about one child, one person, born in the pit and eventually escaped. What's disputed: if bane was also born in the pit. The film revolves around the one child who was born and raised and escaped, and that was Talia. Saying Bane was also born there is drawing conclusions based on original research which on wikipedia is unacceptable. Contrastingly, it makes no sense for him to be born IN the pit because he did not sound anything like the rest of the inhabitants there.He would have sounded like them if he was indeed born and raised and stayed there until the league's invasion. Osh33m (talk) 19:29, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. The only person in the movie with speaking lines who was in the Pit while Bane and Talia were living there was the doctor who operated on Bane, and he sounded nothing like Talia, which doesn't make sense based on your logic. Never do you hear any of the other inhabitants speak during the flash back scenes, so your argument is invalid. You claim that my editing contains original research despite the fact that any reasonable person would conclude that Bane was born in the prison based on the sources which are direct quotes from the movie. According to your argument, Bane just happened to be born in another prison and ended up in the Pit somehow, even though he considers the prison that he apparently wasn't born in his home. How come he says that he didn't see the light until he was grown up, even though according to you he must have been out of prison at some point before being incarcerated again? Don't be silly.

I've explained what bane calling the pit "home" would've meant. also, talia left the pit when she was still a child so for her it makes sense to not sound like the rest of the inhabitants. and it wasn't just the doctor in the pit who was speaking, it was also bruce's companion. more over, it's not just according to me that bane was born and raised somewhere else - tom hardy himself said part of the influence on the voice was bane's caribbean heritage. so there you go. he wouldn't put a Caribbean influence on his voice if his character's origins were strictly on the pit. it's not being silly, it's being reasonable. Osh33m (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce's companion was not in the Pit when Bane and Talia were down there, so your argument is invalid again. Tom Hardy also said that Bane's accent was inspired by a Gypsy bareknuckle boxer, as well as old Latin, which isn't anywhere near Caribbean. The point is, Tom Hardy incorporated a number of different influences to come up with the character's voice. Again your argument doesn't hold water. But now we have to go through administrators now in order to edit this page, so thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.3.108 (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce's companion AND the doctor both speak with a middle eastern accent and the doctor was there at the same time bane was. As such, neither of tom hardy's specified voice influences link to the Pit, which is a Middle Eastern location. The point here is, it does not make sense to say bane was born and raised there and writing his origin off as "also born in the Pit" does not hold water. We need to agree on this because we can't keep going back and forth in reversions. I think the page needs to be left the way it is now. Osh33m (talk) 18:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Knightfall fan film/sources

The Knightfall fan film section should have some sources, and possibly be rewritten. Does anyone know anything about this? May be a notability issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.9.235.79 (talk) 19:34, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"primary agonist"

WP:FILMROLE states, "Interpretations in the form of labels (e.g. protagonist, villain, main character) should be avoided." In this edit, there are two sources: Huffington Post, a reliable source, which repeatedly says "villain" and moviequotesandmore.com, a blog, which does say "agonist". Do we use the reliably sourced "villain" or the blog sourced interpretation? - SummerPhD (talk) 23:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources say "main villain" or "antagonist". Pick one. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Failing that, I've picked one. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Description of penitentiary

Given the overall length and detail of the TDKR section, I feel details about the pit, such as it's age, are superfluous and fail to meet notability guidelines. ----Williamsburghand (talk) 15:45, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly how does it fail to meet notability other than you having a hard-on? Even after I found a credible source you still had to changed it. It doesn't even make the article any longer than it already is. You may feel its superfluous while others may find that piece of information about an important location in the movie interesting.- 24.7.211.135 (talk)

There's no need to be rude or lewd, nor is there any need to assume bad faith. I thought that [this] was a great compromise, so I don't see why you had to change it again. To your question on notability, the entire article is flagged for possibly failing to meet notability guidelines. The TDKR section, in particular, is overlong and repeats many details already covered in the movie's main article. The age of the prison doesn't matter, especially in what is supposed to be a short blurb. The more important details are covered in the first paragraph, ie, what makes this iteration of Bane unique. The second is just a rehashing of the film's plot, and it should really be only one or two sentences. --Williamsburghand (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Before we can do anything we need to hear from an unrelated third party user about this subject, if anyone cares. If I seem overtly hostile, I apologize. I'm just wary about you considering your history as an editor, i.e. your former account.- 24.7.211.135 (talk)

While I understand your concern, I need to remind you to assume good faith. I appreciate your forthrightness, and it's true I used to be a complete troll and horses arse, but I've been lead into the light of Christ. That's why I made my history known - because I want people to know I've got a seat at the table and won't be a jerk any more. Regardless, if you wish please feel free to open a sockpuppet investigation - I am not abusing multiple accounts and never will again.

Now, on to the process here - if ytou wish we can wait/solicit a third party, but generally the first step would be to discuss it. I've said everything I have to say, so please share your thoughts. Williamsburghand (talk) 15:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

done and blocked for socking. Meters (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 6 April 2015

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

If the editors cannot come to an agreement whether Bane was born in the Pit or not, the page should leave it ambiguous that neither confirms nor denies it to be true. Perhaps it should say that Bane "is said to have been born and raised" in the pit "where the viewer is led to believe he escaped from as a child". Then, reveal that the child who escaped was actually Talia al Ghul while leaving it open as to whether Bane himself was born in the prison. VasOling (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:13, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bane in other media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120725113050/http://www.entertainmentearth.com:80/prodinfo.asp?number=MTW7176 to http://www.entertainmentearth.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MTW7176#.UA6mPkTAqmA

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bane in other media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailyblam.com/news/2011/02/21/tom-hardy-denies-wearing-a-mask-for-the-dark-knight-rises-wants-to-gain-30-pounds-to
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713004424/http://au.media.gameboy.ign.com/media/014/014474/imgs_1.html to http://au.media.gameboy.ign.com/media/014/014474/imgs_1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To Jaszen

Just look at the ugly incomprehensible mess of a paragraph that you left on the The Dark Knight Rises section, it's beyond embarrassing to read. If you were so intent on including those sources you should have first learned how to do it properly and without such flimsy claims for Tom Hardy's Bane. You did not pay attention at all to any of my reasoning. Does this read coherently at all? Did you have to keep piling up link after link without any sort of thought or order just to prove a point? Amortias, please read the paragraph down below and tell me if I was in the wrong for removing such a poorly constructed thing.--Lutesque (talk) 22:05, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The character received acclaim from both critics and fans alike, and has been described as one of the best comic book movie villains to date, and one of the greatest film villains of all time. Bane was listed by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_(film_magazine) as the 83rd greatest movie character of all time out of 100. Bane is rated the 5th greatest movie villain of all time on the website ranker with over 1.2 million votes https://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-movie-villains-of-all-time. Ranked number 7 most popular movie villain all time by USA today https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2018/06/19/50-most-popular-movie-villains-all-time/711609002/ Ranked number 12 movie villain ever by https://www.thetoptens.com/top-ten-movie-villains/ https://screenrant.com/dark-knight-rises-superhero-movie-villains-bane-comparison-good/ https://tvovermind.com/the-top-twelve-movie-villains-of-the-decade/ https://www.cbr.com/heath-ledger-joker-best-batman-villain-tom-hardy-bane-outshines-him" it is not edited well at all I agree but the sources themselves are not flimsy they just need to be edited correctly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 22:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The aim of page protection is to stop the endless back and forthing that was going on. You had multiple alternatives to going into a revert-revert-revert cycle but neither of you chose to engage in any form of useful discussion. I'm not going to agree on which version should be there. There were two options for me - I could either block you both for edit-warring or lock the page to attempt to get you to come to some from of agreement. If you cant come to an agreement between yourselves you should try and seek assistance/guidance from one of the available resources such as WP:WikiProject_Comics/Notice_board or WP:3O. If you can come to a consensus then great, we can remove the protection. However you've been back and forthing for over a week and it needs to stop. Amortias (T)(C) 22:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then perhaps keep the sources but with more neutral and less exaggerated wording such as "Hardy's interpretation of Bane received positive reviews, and has been included in Empire's list of so and so" etc. That seems fair to me.Lutesque (talk) 22:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So we would keep him being regarded as one of the best villains but remove the postitve reception? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 22:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the sources praising him but more even-handed wording. --Lutesque (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But he received acclaim from critics and especially audiences. This isn’t steppenwolf or malekith I’ve shown through sources that bane can be right next to thanos in be regarded — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 22:34, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you just plain don't want to cooperate or compromise huh? Where are these magical invisible sources that put Bane right next to Thanos in the hall of the greats?Lutesque (talk) 22:38, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Each site ranking from empire to ranker uses thousands of votes or a consensus and they say bane belongs there. Is there a third party who could vote or rule on this and be definitive about other than you and me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 22:41, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, I'll see about that.Lutesque (talk) 22:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Third Opinion Request:

Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Bane in other media and cannot recall any prior interaction with the editors involved in this discussion which might bias my response. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." The material in question should not be included. Over at Reliable Sources Noticeboard it is well established that Internet sources which run polls and then publish the results, such as Ranker.com, are not acceptable reliable sources for asserting the reliability of the results of those polls. Since they invite anyone to participate they are, among other things, self published sources. There is also an argument to be made that even if they might avoid prohibition as SPS's, they're excludable because they give undue weight to their results which have no verification or quality-checking. With this kind of article which is chock-full of material which does not comport with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, a common response is "But what about X or Y in the article?" The answer to that is simple: One or more violations of policy don't justify additional violations. The solution to X and Y is to fix them, not to pile on more violations.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TransporterMan (TALK) 17:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok so ranker is out. But what about the other sources. And what if I can find more that are not. What does fix mean?

I'd say Empire and Screenrant and CBR are fine. The others absolutely not. TheTopTens in particular should not be used as a source for anything in Wikipedia. Lutesque (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So unverified polls are out. I can agree with that that’s fair — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]