Talk:Krypton (comics)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Problems

Krypton no longer exists as it was destroyed as a result of highly unstable geological conditions.

Jeez, I'll say!  :-)

Never mind that, I once removed the comment "pu also is what pluto is made of" from plutonium - now that's something to worry about :) --Camembert

The entire civilization and race of Krypton perished in the explosion, except for one sole survivor: the baby Kal-El

What about Supergirl? Her home city exploded off of Krypton and formed an asteroid, which the citizens covered with a dome to keep air in, then the city was destroyed and she was the only survivor. Or has the Superman universe changed this lately? -- Zoe

Since this is an encyclopedia and not Who's Who in the DC Universe, the historical perspective is what matters most, not whatever is the most situation current in "Superman continuity," so the Supergirl info is definitely valid -- Kaijan 07:00, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Looks like the original is credited to Roger Stern et al (see http://www.unstable.com/oraclewiki/index.php?title=Krypton). I'm deleting it from here because the poster of the bulk of this did much the same with a Babylon 5 article, and I don't really think a blatant copyvio in a talk page deserves the rigmarole of a VfD... --Eric TF Bat 06:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone should mention Krypton as depicted in the 1948 serial and the first episode of the 1950s television show.

Merge from Kryptonians

Vote

• Merge because the Kryptonians article is a short article that rehashes information that goes into more detail in this article, Krypton (comics), not to mention the multitude of Superman articles. Exvicious 08:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Tai112 10:51, 13 November 2006 (Eastern)
• Obviously "Krypton" and "Kryptonians" are not the same thing. However in the interest of saving space and making referencing easier, I vote Merge. An article listing the (numerous) kryptonian characters there have been throught the years might be justified, however. -Wilfredo Martinez 16:14, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• I don't think these two articles should be merged. Krypton & Kryptonians are two different subjects. Just leave them alone & let the Kryptonians article expand as time passes on. Son of Kong

I think that both articles would benefit fromt he merging. Just as the list and personalities (and fashion sensibilities of the planet and its inhabitants have evolved over time, I think they aren't really supposed to be separate articles. I vote for a merging.Arcayne 22:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

My argument is pretty much above... what's your opinion? Exvicious 08:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Don't merge This would be like placing all information about humans in the article on Earth. CovenantD 07:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC) Merge Not really, there isn't as much info because Kryptonians are a fictional race. Exvicious 22:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC) Don't Merge If you merge it, you risk making the Krypton article too long and then you get a "this article is too long" tag. - Defunctzombie 03:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, the best way to resolve that matter is to trim down the chubby article that currently is squatting here. We don't need to list every publishing detail for Krypton when we can take an overview of how Krypton has been treated or envisioned by successive generations of editors and writers. If people want the specific publishing details, we can furnish a link to do that.Arcayne 22:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Merge ...

That one wasn't very cut and dried, and as it's a few months old, I'd rather see someone re-list it or be bold, if they're a regular contributor. The Glossary should probably go to Wictionary anyway, and may make this page too long. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 19:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

In-universe tag

I don't think this article suffers an in-universe problem. -- Beardo 14:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rtk2.jpg

Image:Rtk2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Gravity

I removed (further, Krypton had much heavier gravity, making them all stronger as well, their muscles evolved/adapted to the greater resistance). from the Golden Age description; AFAIK that wasn't orginally part of the concept, but was added during the early Silver Age. If I'm wrong, someone cite and return it, please. Noclevername (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Nothing serious, but "Silver your face Krypton" isn't correct. I came here to read up on Krypton and there's a bunch of stuff wrong. I don't know enough about this to correct things, so someone else should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.243.85 (talk) 01:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Social Darwinism?

This was found under 2.1.1:

"In keeping with the Social Darwinist theories popular at the time, the people of Krypton were thus said to be more "highly evolved" than Earth's younger, more primitive race. This can be seen in the early descriptions of Superman having come from "a race of super-men" in early comics and serials, and one of the labels associated with him, "The Man of Tomorrow"."

The concept of Social Darwinism described was not actually Social Darwinism at all, nor was it very popular "at the time", assuming "at the time" refers to any time during the existence of Superman. I'll leave it for a week, welcoming argument, but I don't feel like re-writing those sentences to salvage information so in a week I;m just going to erase it all.Landfritter (talk) 03:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. Its gone. I gave almost a month. Landfritter (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 15:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Daxamites

I asked this at Talk:Daxam, but it's relevant here too.

Were the Daxamites described as descendants of Kryptonian colonists pre-Crisis? Obviously, the story about the Eradicator affecting their DNA to give them the vulnerability to lead is a post-Crisis story, because the Eradicator didn't exist pre-Crisis. But were there any pre-Crisis attempts to explain why the powers of Daxamites and Kryptonians were so similar?

This article currently mentions the Daxamites' Kryptonian origins in the Silver Age section. Until my last edit, it also mentioned the Eradicator, who can't have been part of the pre-Crisis origin of Daxam, as the character/device hadn't been created yet. Should the Eradicator's role be removed altogether from the Daxam section, as it's mentioned later in the "Modern to Post-Modern" section? And were the pre-crisis Daxamites descended from Kryptonians? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

New Krypton

Should there be a new section for New Krypton in the article or should New Krypton have a standalone article? 173.29.148.123 (talk) 12:01, 24 December 2009 (UTC)