Talk:Salvation Run

	Comics portal 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.
	This article is supported by DC Comics work group.
	This article may need general cleanup. Please see below for details.

Primary Sources

I must confess I'm a bit confused about the "no primary sources" guideline as it applies to fiction. It seems to me that in presenting factual information (not thematic analysis or criticism) -- things like "The story shows super-villains exiled to an alien world" -- it should be sufficient to cite the book. It's certainly verifiable: all someone has to do is locate a copy and read it. The idea that a third-party publication is a more reliable reference than the book itself seems to violate common sense. It's apparently sufficient to cite a written account of a real event, but not a written account of a fictional event? --Kelson (talk) 20:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's the thematic analysis or criticism that is lacking in this article. Pairadox (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes: The "no primary sources" rule is absurd when reporting on published works, especially works of fiction, but it is silly enough when reporting on published non fiction. That X said y should be supported by citing X, not citing W citing X.

Indeed, the longer a chain of citations goes, the less reliable it becomes. This is particularly the case with controversial Xs and ys, for example Hitler. Thus, for example, the many, many, many reports of widespread capitalist support for Hitler always rely on very highly derived sources: A cites B who cites C, who cites D, who cites E, who cites F, and at each point in the chain, the story changes markedly so that by the time we get to E and F, the story as told by E and F is unrecognizably different from the story as told by A and B. James A. Donald (talk) 00:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Status of Gorilla Grodd

Okay, enough with this edit war stuff. we have topick a status and stick to it. I don't know how things are done on Wiki entries on comics, so enlighten me and the rest of us as to how a situation like this, a character who's death is questionable, is to be handled. InsaneZeroG (talk) 17:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gorilla Grodd has been solicited as returning in the The Flash #240. http://www.dccomics.com/comics/?cm=9334 Monkey-Boy (talk) 21:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties

Anybody else think that this list should be removed?IchiGhost (talk) 20:56, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Actually I do not think it should be removed. I find the list helpful and informative; an easy way to get the information without having to continuously scan the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.171.72.70 (talk) 16:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]