Jump to content

Talk:Batman/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

This archive page covers approximately the dates between March 2006 and April 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Batman/Archive05. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Frank Foster ll

Re-added the below sentence. It is a commonly-known story, authenticated by DC comics - not a crackpot theory as someone suggested - and it is an important part of the Batman creation story. It is written in a non-POV way. Feel free to suggest grammatical improvements, but do not delete without discussion here.

"Some believe that Batman first appeared in artist Frank Foster's 1932 drawings[1], though others argue it is a case of parallel evolution."

It is a brief mention. A reference link is offered for a detailed account of the story.

DS72.72.47.78 14:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

linkspam

Removed the following today

More because I remember these links being posted before, and removed with a citation to wiki policy. I'm not sure what that policy is; in particular, the batmanytb seemed like a decent site. The other two, not so much. Anyone care to enlighten? Also, might it be time to archive some of the older stuff on this page? Simnel 09:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The rules concerning external links are in Wikipedia:External links. Keep in mind the "Links that are added to promote a site." under "Links to avoid" (which is why I kept removing Legions of Gotham, since it was added previously by the owner, a pretty clear case of promotion). I pretty sure there's also some guideline that says to keep the external link section from being too overblown, but I can't find it. Vintage Batman Toys would fit better under the article for the '60s series, anyway. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 13:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Infinite Crisis and multiple Batmans

Rumors from 52 are that Batman isn't going to be Bruce Wayne (make of that what you will), but regardless, three people have 'been' Batman now: Bruce, Dick, Jean-Paul. Would be be amiss to make a Bruce Wayne page, dump most of the Persona stuff in there, and replace it with a list of 'Batmen' (which is not the right term I don't think...)? -- Ipstenu 15:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Unlike a character like Flash or Green Lantern, Batman is IMMEDIATELY associated with Bruce Wayne. I would bet that 95% of non-comics people who have heard of Flash or GL could not name their civilian IDs (any version) but virtually everyone who knows Batman... IE, almost everyone in a Western country... knows that he is Bruce Wayne. Aside from that... even if DC shifts around who Batman is, they'll shift back soon enough. Simnel 12:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Very true! (says she who can only grock two GLS: Alan Scott and Hal Jordan, and everyone else is 'blah blah lantern cakes'). Something still feels ... off about the Batman page, though, and I think it's that it's very much BATMAN the icon/history/legend and not Batman/Bruce Wayne. Which is ... I dunno, a 'History of Batman' sort of thing? Deleted out my own long suggestion thing, see my reply to my reply, doh! -- Ipstenu 14:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I made an example User:Ipstenu/Batman and User:Ipstenu/Evolution_of_Batman pages. Soemtimes it's easier to SEE a change, I feel. -- Ipstenu 15:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Batman's shoulders

I dont know how to make a heading so Im just putting this at the bottom, Ive noticed in numerous appearances of Batman he has had "shoulder spikes" for lack of a better term, that have been used on and off by artists. A recent example is the Green Lantern Rebirth limited series. I was just curious as to when this was first used. 64.53.130.241 04:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

earliest i can think of is 80's, Batman: The Killing Joke161.38.222.14 15:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Citation for Clooney comment

I found and added a citation for the recently added George Clooney comment about playing Batman as gay. It sounds like Clooney was being at least somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but we may as well include it briefly. A bit more of the context of the Barbara Walters interview can be found here, but I felt silly typing "McDougal, Nuts" in the author field of the cite news template. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Heroclix

Moved a Heroclix section someone added to the In Other Media page. Simnel 19:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Deleted?

Where did the article go?Bjones 14:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia was having a glitch. No worries :) -- Ipstenu 16:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Homosexual interpretations section deleted again

Ipstenu deleted most of this section yesterday, in an edit that also included changing some language regarding a Batman Beyond character. The edit summary left only mentioned the McGinnis edits, not mentioning the huge deletions in the homosexual interp. section (along with a few other minor edits to other sections).

With no explanation for the deletions, and no discussion about it on this talk page first regarding a section that has had a *lot* of discussion in the past (recent and distant), I'm restoring the deleted material. It's been a long-held consensus among editors here that the material should be included. --Krich (talk) 08:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

If you noticed, I put it in it's own article. Homosexual interpretations of Batman. I agree it should be included, but the Batman article is bordering on 45k, and at this point the only way to 'trim' is to split pages. I apologize about the edit summary, I thought I remembered to put that in. -- Ipstenu 16:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Yet another attempt to remove politically incorrect material from the Batman article. I will point out that the excuse of length is more than feeble (the current Featured Article is 51K, 6 K longer than this version of Batman) and the fact that this was sprung on the article without explanation or discussion, in the face of exhaustive previous discussions and consensus here that the material was objective, appropriate, and could not be removed without breaking the rules is not in keeping with accepted practice. The so-called new article "Homosexual interpretations of Batman" has been listed for deletion, here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexual interpretations of Batman Haiduc 02:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

nm - I see why folks feel they way they do, and I want to reiterate I was not trying to delete it, which was why I put in a short stub and a link to the main article. Length being half the issue, unwieldy being the other, but I gather this is just my perception. Trying to be bold failed this time. Bygones. -- Ipstenu 12:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

45k is not thought large these days, over 50 is when we have cause for concern. Hiding talk 12:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair 'nough - I removed the link to the 'main' article and fiddled with the image layout. My stupid browser ate my comments, though. *grumble* Time to reinstall things. -- Ipstenu 21:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Batman is not gay

This is the worst article I have ever seen. The whole articel pretends like Batman is gay and is the most garbage i've read in a long time.

unsigned comment by 68.23.96.139

Hmm. As I recall, one section of the article mentions the opinion that Batman, his stories and lifestyle may have homosexual overtones, but I don't believe that quite fits your comment, "the whole articel pretends like Batman is gay". Unless you mean happy, which–––despite my personally doubts that the article pretends this, either–––is more subjective. Though, with things like the Infinite Crisis——and the events which happened there-in)——and the return of Jason Todd as an anti-heroic murderer, I doubt bats is very happy these days.

As for the article being "garbage", you wouldn't just be saying that because it mentions homosexuality, would ya, cutey? Ace Class Shadow 03:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I respect all your opinions and i can understand how to some people Batman & Robin might seem gay, but in reality Batman and Robin are NOT! gay. A few reasons why: Bruce Wayne is potrayed as a wealthy playboy and ladies man. Bruce Wayne has also been shown to have only heterosexual relationships and only heterosexual flings in comic books and other Batman related media with female characters only like Catwoman, Talia, Vicki Vale ect. Dick Grayson has also been shown to have only heterosexual relationships and only heterosexual flings with female characters only.. like Starfire, Barbara Gordon, Cheyenne Freemont ect. The "gay accusation" goes way back to when the character of Dick Grayson was still a little kid. If Batman and Robin had a "homosexual relationship" or whatever other "closet innuendos" that are being thrown at them were true... then that would make Bruce Wayne (a grown man) just as evil as the animals he goes after. He would then be a pedophile because he would be having a homosexual reationship with a little kid. I say little kid because this gay accusation B.S. first started back in the 1950s when the Robin character was still a child in the Batman comics. Another thing in the Batman page under the "Seduction of the Innocent" section someone put a picture of Bruce and Dick in bed together. first off Bruce was Dick's legal guardian, in other words his "father" there is nothing gay about a child sleeping next to his father or father figure if there is not anything immoral going on between the two characters. Another thing Bruce and Dick are shown far away from each other in the bed picture which also shows that they dont sleep right next to each other. But i guess the opinion on that bed picture in the article and the "gay" accusation thing is different to each person.Dick Grayson

People have seen many things in the story, and the story has changed a great deal over the years, as has our society. This is just one aspect that we are documenting. Haiduc 19:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

But...the article never says he's a homosexual. >.> Ace Class Shadow 18:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I think this is just one anon user who's reading titles and not context. If you read the whole section, it ain't 'Oooh Batman's a fairy!' at all. So big ol' whatever to 68.23.96.139 for missing the point. Moving on. -- Ipstenu 21:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

quoted from above section

"Bruce was Dick's legal guardian"

no further comment needed.

just keepin it real. --Ghetteaux 15:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

picture caption

Hi, you know, I couldn't help noticing that the picture that appears next to 'Bruce Wayne (Batman) and Dick Grayson (Robin) in bed together', if you look closely, the artist has drawn two beds. (two headboards, a line to the left of batman suggesting the edge of the bed, and it wouldn't be too strange to suggest they have identical sheets.) I'm not a user here, but I thought maybe someone should stick the word 'appear to be' in there somewhere. Though the two beds only seem a couple inches apart, hm? Yes, it's not very important I know.

Just so you know, anyone can edit Wikipedia, whether they are a registered user or not. Nevertheless, I changed it so it says they are in "adjacent beds"; you're right that there is clearly a space between the two beds. --Rocketgoat 22:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I've edited that caption again to say adjoining beds. -- Ipstenu 19:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

In other pictures of that bedroom, the beds are usually shown to be separated by a night stand, and sometimes the beds are farther apart than that. I would say that the angle of the picture makes judging distance difficult. Nonetheless, the distance is ambiguous, and the term "adjoining" comes across as being right next to each other, whereas "adjacent" allows the possibility a little more room. --Chris Griswold 21:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Can I say 'Hella close'? Adjacent is the right word, though, yeah. Gleefully ambiguous. -- Ipstenu 22:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

face the fax people, the headboard is simply decorated with an orange stripe. batmann and robin are in bed together. however, since it is quite ambiguous, as noted above, the most neutral way to caption the photo is simply "in bed" --Ghetteaux 10:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Obviously the 'facts' are in dispute :) The 'separation' is the same color as the wall, which is why it's got a lot of wiggle room. But saying 'in bed' is fine. That's pretty neutral. -- Ipstenu 11:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Sage wisdom from a person who cannot spell "facts". I doubt what you say, but fine. "In bed". I guess that lets the reader decide. The Anti-Gnome 21:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

"In bed" has obvious connotations. I would argue "waking up" is the most neutral we could get, although "in adjacent beds" is the most accurate. --Rocketgoat 21:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Rocketgoat with the save! Okay. I can dig that. I'll change it in a flash! The Anti-Gnome 21:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


sorry homiez, it gets even more neutral than that. but face the faxx, they are ga-a-a-a-a-y. --Ghetteaux 22:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh-Huh. Well, homeboy, I'm getting a Wigga-Vandal vibe off you right now. So, however you feel, I suggest you keep your POV to yourself and take your "I wanna be black" attitude elsewhere. they're not helpful to the discussion and quite annoying. The Anti-Gnome 23:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

do you know my race? i never said batman wasn't the most awesome crime fighting avenger. batmann roxx! but certainly you see the homoeroticism, right? have you seen the tv show, homie? don't hate -- appreciate --Ghetteaux 11:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Knock off the personal slams, guys. That's not nice. HoYay! does not equal gay, and it's a disservice, in an encyclopedia to not attempt and give a fair and neutral cast to the article. Everyone, take a step back. We all love Bats, or at least we like him enough to edit this and want it to be the best. Let's take a moment to think about the section and come back later to talk, when emotions aren't so high. Rocketgoat, I think that 'waking up in adjacent beds' is the best we're going to get. Thank you. -- Ipstenu 11:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

word. --Ghetteaux 11:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

This means you too, Ghetteaux. Work as a team, please.
FYI, I suggest leaving the title 'Homosexual Interperations' alone. We've bandied about it before, and it's pretty much the most neutral and yet accurate depiction of what that section is. Homosexual readings of Bats. Also, since Batman isn't gay, don't put LGBT on him. For Catwoman or Renne Montoya that's appropriate (we all know Holly and Renne are lesbians). Bats? Straight, regardless of what people read into things.
Homoeroticism does not equal homosexuality. (though Bruce Wayne's a wee bit Metro, IMO) -- Ipstenu 13:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

this mean you- (beat) 2- (beat) Ipsten- (beat) "U".
4 real, though, everything ever written is an interpretation. there is no such thing as real objectivity. cheque out postmodernism. --Ghetteaux 15:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Oy, tell me we're not going to have a metaphysical argument over the validity of what is and is not real in a fictional world? How about this. Batman, as written, is not gay. Had the book Seduction of the Innocent not been written, it'd probably be a moot point (I know more people who think Supes is gay, but that may be the Clark/Lex effect from Smallville). In DC Universe Canon, Bats is hetero. That's as factual as we can get. It is also fact that people have written about Batman's representation as fostering a homosexual lifestile, and promoting the gay agenda (we have an agenda?). So, Mr 'Keeping it Real', we aim for as much objectivity in the situation as is humanly possible. And that's the best we can do. -- Ipstenu 15:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Word (again), homie. --Ghetteaux 17:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Batman as Gay? (again)

Who in their right mind whould think that Batman is gay? Because he lives with a young boy in a big house? I don't get it! Bob Kane's Batman wasn't gay. Frank Miller's wasn't gay. Tim Burton's wasn't gay. The only one that could have been inturpareted as gay would be Joel Shumacher's Batman! W Anderson 20:57, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Right. Well, I think this has been thoroughly talked out.

Getto-poseur-dude, my hat's off to you for being more outrageous than I. Extremely hard to do, believe me. It's not a compliment, however. Oh and as for the homoerotica, let me just say we didn't need to know why you read the comics. I mean...we really didn't. The Anti-Gnome 01:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Infobox streamlining

Please see revelant topics at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/templates and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Infobox: Powers section. Thanks. dfg 06:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Pardon me for not elaborating earlier (especially on a Featured Article). The consensus on the Notable Powers section is to keep the information as brief as possible, with elaboration of the powers belonging in the main article text. In addition to the above two links, please also see: Template talk:Superherobox. Thanks, dfg 02:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Alternate universe relatives

shouldn't the relatives be current canon. these alternate reality relatives should just be mentioned in the main article.

So long as they're clearly defined as alt-verse relations, I don't have a problem keeping them in. Especially since the alt-kids' pages point back to Bats. -- Ipstenu 16:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Disambig

Perhaps Batman needs to be a disambiguation page. There are things like provinces and cities named batman unrelated to the comic. Real life should be more notable than fiction. --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

You mean like Batman (disambiguation)? That already exists and is linked at the top of the Batman page? -- Ipstenu 17:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Disambiguation says, "Ask yourself: When a reader enters this term and pushes "Go", what article would they realistically be expecting to view as a result? When there is no risk of confusion, do not disambiguate nor add a link to a disambiguation page." I think that the likelihood of a reader intending to find the superhero Batman is sufficiently large that the content can be contained at Batman, and the other meanings at Batman (disambiguation). All other things being equal, real life would trump fiction, but I think that in this case the fictional meaning is of a sufficiently important cultural icon that the fiction can have the primary location. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

GRU

Look at the GRU logo,it has a bat on it. Dudtz 4/18/06 6:58 PM EST

Er ... so? Don't see how that has to do with Batman. Sure, it looks similar to the 1970s/80s logo of Bats, but it's sort of like a wolf silhouette. There's only so much variation. (okay, it looks JUST like the logo from an old comic, but I doubt the Russian decided to use Batman's logo.) -- Ipstenu 23:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh come on! They're exactly the same. Ripoff artists. Ace Class Shadow 03:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I just meant that there are only so many ways you can draw a wolf, and only so many ways a bat. Still. So a russian agency possibly ripped off the logo. That's for DC to ballyhoo. It's unverified coincidence for us :) -- Ipstenu 07:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


Tim Drake

With Jack Drake being dead, and with Tim Drake living in the pool house at Wayne Manor, should we add him to the infobox as Batman's third adopted son? Though Bruce Wayne may have legally obtained the right to house Tim, we should keep in mind that Tim Drake is likely major by now. What does everyone think? Should we add him? --Ace ETP 21:12, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I feel like the details of his relationship with Tim should definitely be on the page, but I wouldn't list Tim as being Bruce's adopted son without specific evidence from the canon of Batman books. --Rocketgoat 23:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
God knows if we say 'Living with Bruce Wayne' and vice versa, we'll have the gayness back ;) Wait and see. I suspect by the end of Face the Face we'll know -- Ipstenu 00:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I beleive Timmy went to great lengths to avoid being "adopted" by Bruce. He lives in the pool house, or some such, on the manor grounds. It may be appropriate to mention it as being in spirit, but I don't think it's necessary. Violet Grey 2:29 20 May, 2006

Anti-hero

While I personally don't believe Batman is comic book anti-hero (since he ins't like Punisher or any other protagonist who is given characteristics normally associated with villains without the audience's symphathy being lost, which is the very definition of an anti-hero), I agree with Ipstenu that if he has been historically referred to as such (however incorrectly I may believe that has been done), then that fact deserves a mention in this page. However, with anti-heroism being a characteristic of Batman that wouldn't be associated with him by people not familiar with comic books, or by readers with the opinion that we should concentrate on facts rather than historical interpretations, I'm moving the whole shebang about him being the first anti-hero or one of the first along with Namor over to the character history sub-section and taking it off the introductory paragraphs. I hope you agree with me about that being the best compromise. --Ace ETP 00:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Works for me. :) -- Ipstenu 11:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

If I may, I'd like you to consider that it was a different time AND how "dark" Batman currently is. Being a superhero, or just being a hero, believe it or not, is generally something left to "nice people". Would you call Batman nice? Friendly? Social? (ignoring the version Adam West was cast as). Bats is an Anti-Hero. I disagreed with it (for a moment) at first, but you have to open your mind a little. Anti-Heroes aren't always Noble criminals or "a person who'll kill for justice". Forget whatever stereotypes you don't think he fits. Better yet, read the Wikipedia article. He's a vigilante. Now, I'll admit, the additional subtypes make it easy to get on the list, but lately, comic superheroes aren't always taking the law into their own hands. Superman's a great example. Tim Drake's another. That dude seems really easy going for a guy that would, technically, have a long list of people to hate and/or go after for revenge. Anyway, I think the way it was mentioned in the intro was better or at least could co-exist with the "intrepretation" entry. We can debate it amongst ourselves. but doesn't neutrally and a need to inform the reader dicate that mention it sooner rather than later? Besides, this isn't as hard to determination as sexuality. You watch (or read) a guy for...let's say ten years, I think you'd be able to tell what kind of person he was, in terms of what archetype he fit. I'd like to think the people that dubbed Bats an anti-hero knew him as well as you or me. So...uh...respond when you can. I'll try to resist the urge to change it back without hear you guys out more. ACS (Wikipedian) 20:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

My reason for stating why Batman being an anti-hero is more of an historical interpretation or opinion than a fact is simple. Bear with me for a moment. After that jerk Frederick Werthram started bitching, Batman started sucking. All the greatness of the best 1940's comic book was sucked away in favor of around 15 years of friggin' Bat-Mite and Ace the Bat-Hound. Luckily, all that crap was discarded in 1964 by Julius Schwartz so Batman could go back to his darker roots. Then came Adam West (aka Satan, the Prince of All Evil), and the comic books started to emulate the TV Series. When that ended, it was in the hands of writers like Dennis O'Neil to bring the real Batman back for a second time. In all three of those three great, dark periods (pre-Werthram, post-1964, post-Adam West), Batman was never, not once, portrayed as an anti-hero. Sure, he was neither very friendly, nice nor social in his Batman persona, but he was looking to strike fear into the hearts of criminals so no eight-year-old boy would ever have his parents gunned down in front of him ever again (he was even portrayed as being able to smile in his daily life as Bruce Wayne without pretending, even if the days of going on picnics with Superman in World's Finest Comics were gone so we could have them fighting to death manipulated by Terra-Man). Batman was looking for justice. Not once did he look for vengeance, as you say, ACS. He never even physically harmed any of the various criminals once thought to be his parents' murdereder (you may insist on killing not being a necessary characteristic for making someone an anti-hero, but causing some sort of lasting physical impediment to the people who piss him off the most certainly almost always is. Batman, unlike the Punisher - who I hate and agree is the most stereotypical example of comic book anti-hero - would rather beat up the drug dealers who make his town a bad place than the person who made his life a living hell). You also mentioned hate. I don't believe Batman really hates anyone but himself for failing to be better (for example: check out the moment in Infinite Crisis #3 were he goes: "God, I wish...I wish I could just start over). Here's something more personal: I've always interpreted Batman's conflicts with people like Jason Todd and Hush being based on the fact that while Batman blames himself for everything that has happened to the people he loves, Jason Todd and Hush feel he should get his head out of his ass and start blaming (and/or killing) people like the Joker or Zucco. Batman didn't become a brooding jerk until the late 1980's. And even then he wasn't an anti-hero. One could argue that the most famous Batman story ever is "The Dark Knight Returns", in which he is portrayed as mostly anti-heroic, but not only is the story out-of-continuity (making my point about Batman's anti-heroism being more of a historical interpretation than fact more valid), but the guy who wrote it was scripting Batman's Modern Age origin at the same time, with an entirely different feel. Granted, Frank Miller didn't portray the Year One Batman as a happy-go-lucky guy. But he portrayed him as a practical man, able to relax when he felt his job was being done right, even if he felt a little uneasy at first. A practical man who was able to this job mostly well despite willingly carrying the burden of things that weren't his fault (this interpreation continued for years with arcs like Death In The Family, The Killing Joke, KnightSaga, Legacy, Cataclysm, No Man's Land, War Games, Hush, Identity Crisis, etc.). You also mentioned working outside the law as an anti-heroic quality...how many heroes are actually sanctioned by a legitimate body? Let's take a Modern Age Batman writer that I don't like and I still will find a perfect example of doing that without anti-heroic overtones: Chuck Dixon. Specifically, Chuck Dixon's Legacy arc. Does Batman using brutal force against Bane without having a warrant make him an anti-hero? No. Bane would have killed Batman and helped Ra's Al Ghul spread an epidemic. Batman was being a hero, pure and simple. With this happening in arcs where Batman's detective abilities don't influence the storyline a lot, it seems that we can assert that NOT being an anti-hero is more Batman-like than being a detective. And when he's working outside the law AND as a detective, he does it in such a helpful manner no one dares no help him (check out the recent Face The Face story arc), or just end up being sorry for not having been on his side ("Bruce Wayne: Murderer"). Even if there's some truth in what you say, ACS, as a complex lead character, Batman needs to have flaws for the story to be entertaining, but never does he sink into anti-heroism, because the flaws the audience notices never make them doubt his heroic qualities and put their sympathy for him as a protagonist on hold for a second; rather, they just gain more uninterrupted sympathy for the hero that is Batman. We just keep filling more sorry for the guy. Put it in whatever section about character interpretation or evolution you like, but the whole thing about Batman being an anti-hero certainly doesn't belong in an introductory paragraph about him. --Ace ETP 23:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, maybe it was a long moment I had you bearing with me, but I just hate when people claim Batman is an anti-hero. --Ace ETP 23:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I sense some bias, but nothing overtly harmful. You make a good case. Very well. It stays out of the intro. I guess this means Namor wins the title (in your book, anyway). ACS (Wikipedian) 00:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

People handling the anti-hero article are never going to agree with us. They are right in the sense that Batman fits the definition of anti-hero the article uses, but the concept of antihero comic books creators and readers use is different. Almost all comic book heroes but Captain America fit their description anyways. --T-man, the wise 07:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

  • ACS, you sensed bias because I didn't struggle against my bias influencing me, because I wanted to give you my opinion on the matter, something which I can't do without a little bias. But as I've said before, opinions are not facts. That's why even though I'll defend what I said earlier to the death, it would uncyclopedic to say "Batman is not a criminal because of beating up Bane without a warrant. He did it to save people. He is a hero." in the opening paragraph, the same way it would be uncyclopedic to say "Batman is anti-hero" in the same place. However, both would be acceptable when put in the appropiate context and when making it clear that they are opinions. That's why I think the whole stuff about anti-heroes fits better in the character history section (although, if you'd like it for it to be more notable, I think it would be okay to put in whatever place you consider appropiate, except of course, the introduction). If anyone is still on the fence about Batman being an anti-hero or not, I'll insist: consider Frank Miller: He was told to write two Batman stories at the same time, one non-canon and one canon, Dark Knight Returns and Year One. And Batman was an anti-hero in the former and a practical rennaissance man in the latter. As for the people handling the anti-hero article, let them come. A good debate is never boring. --Ace ETP 20:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

What is his superpower?

What is Batman's superpower? As far as I can tell, the closest he has is exorbitant wealth, which hardly qualifies one as a superhero. He fights crime, he wears an elaborate costume, and he makes use of gadgets, but does not have what I can see as superhuman abilities, so how is he a superhero? Isn't he just a hero?

Read the article Superhero and especially the common traits section. CovenantD 22:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


"Todd Gelineau"

in the article we can read: "* Bruce Wayne briefly went by the name "Todd Gelineau" in an issue in the 70's. Todd Gelineau was a childhood friend of creator Bob Kane." Is this really true?! Please name a source or a comic book. thanks --87.78.166.56 12:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

This line was introduced in an edit made on [[16 April 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Batman&oldid=48751412]. Since there is NO issue number, NO citation for it, and NO corroboration for it, and since I'm sure it's complete bullshit, I'm removing it immediately. Kaijan 21:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

something i remember

"what do you call it when two superheroes get run over by a steamroller?

Flatman and Ribbon.

when i was a kid this was a pretty common joke. --Ghetteaux 22:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

So was the Jingle Bells parody. But we'd have to make a jokes about Batman page for them all and I'm not certain they're that notable (not that my gran doesn't sing 'Batmobile lost a wheel!' every year...) -- Ipstenu 23:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
ha ha ha ha ha! i forgot about that one. --Ghetteaux 10:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  1. ^ Batman drawings 1932 [1]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Batman/Archive_4&oldid=1053225764"