Talk:Countdown to Final Crisis/Archive 1

message: Keith Giffen interview about Countdown.
and this article should probably be renamed Countdown (comic book) like 52 (comic book) and Civil War (comic book)
--EXV // + @ 01:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Countdown (DC comics) or DC comic book would be okay ... I dunno, I have the feeling we'll see 'Countdown' as a title for something else again :P And Civil War too no doubt. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 01:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: There is actually another comic, not comic book though, using Countdown as well, which is part of the reason I just inserted DC into the article title.  I totally understand putting in book, as in Countdown (comic book) or Countdown (DC comic book), though.  I think the current title should probably be okay, but I'm up to a change if needed. -- CasimirAngel 17:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  more info 

message: How do we know that the four issues included in this article are tie-in issues?  Are there any sources to go with this? Ccm043 23:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be, and I don't have the info right in front of me atm, that they got popped in based on the solicit information in Diamond's Previews. The same info should still be available at Newsarama and/or Comic Book Resources. - J Greb 18:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes it does... this is something that could very quickly degenerate the article into a checklist. - J Greb 04:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Being Bold and removing them. This is a crossover with the entire DCU!  No way should we be listing every bloody issue mentioned in Countdown! Our list is at 5 comics already and we've only had two issues!  By #25, we could have over 60.  Make them in-line references to what's important in the story, but not a list, please. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tie-in Issues 

message: for some reason, nobody put any references in the plot section.  i think this is important because of crossreferencing to amazons attack, the lightning saga, and presumably future storylines.
also, karate kid isn't mentioned in the synopsis as well
i *did* like the idea of updating via plot point (or by character) instead of linearly adding each issue.  it's less confusing and easier to summarize, which i thought was a major problem of the 52 article, which is why i kinda stayed away from that one.  i added headings and arranged them in alphabetical order, since it's not really an issue into dividing them by importance.  although, i did make a smaller "other events" section for minor plot developments, which of course can later be expanded if need be.  --EXV // + @ 20:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 52 had too many crossovers and inter-related whoo-hah going on.  This works nicely so far. :) -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 13:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree; following the main characters seems to work fairly nicely, and having a governing plot covering the overview seems to work nicely (so long as we avoid drawing conclusions without reliable citation). - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My organization edit 

message: We don't know. I borrowed the comic to read it and you're right, it's inference to say why.  So I changed the sentence to just state they were struck by lightning.  It could have just been weather, but to say 'Unknown source' implies someone aimed it and we just don't know yet. I think leaving it open to interpretation is the fairest we can get right now. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 20:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry *zap* Ow. Sorry *zap* OW! (done with the joke!) -- Seriously, though, I did not add it back in the second time. You reverted a different edit with the same 'sorry' comment :) Yes, cliffhanger. I thought it was clear that she said 'sorry' and got zapped, but my coworker disagreed, so y'know, I think we're right in saying 'She was hit by lightning' Why? No idea. Yet :) Find out tomorrow! Whee! -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 20:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Struck by lightning because ... 

message: Dan Didio has confirmed that the character we see in the promo image is Red Robin, and that this Red Robin is Jason Todd. He's not only confirmed this in the Newsarama interview, but in the latest issues of DC Comics. Right now, I'm looking at DC Nation in Justice Society of America #7 where Didio is explaining the first teaser image: "Jason Todd becomes Red Robin, driving a wedge in the Challengers from Beyond." Everyone contributing to this page seems to know this. Yet the section still references an article from March that doesn't even directly quote Didio to make it appear that the Red Robin in the teaser image is not Jason Todd and to suggest that it's in question that the character in the promo is Red Robin. Apparently this has brought all sorts of heat to this article so I'm not going to change it myself. But barring time travel, I don't see how Didio's vague and possibly misreported statement at a convention in March affects his clear assertion otherwise in July in his own company's books. Are we just assuming that the executive editor of DC is an unreliable source now because he named the wrong Flash? Or is the article simply misrepresenting the order of his public statements to avoid debate over the article? Universaladdress 16:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know what? I'm just going to go ahead and edit it to make it correct. We have a statement from Didio, in the pages of DC Comics, that the figure we see in the image is called Red Robin and that his identity is Jason Todd. So that's that. Universaladdress 14:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just make sure to cite it where you saw it; I am not the only one who will stomp undocumented info. I read the notations in various DC comics as well. State where it came from. I won't add a 'cn' tag now, but if we can't figure out a way to cite it in, say, a few days, I will tag it thusly. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know where this came from as I provided a direct citation as soon as I added it to the article. Ah, well, I suppose it's old news now. Universaladdress 00:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Red Robin

message: should the multiverse story be included somewhere?BlueShrek 04:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there citation comparing/defining the two? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: history

message: So we've got confirmation from DC in a solicitation for JSA that "Alex Ross joins Geoff Johns as co-writer for Part 1 of “Thy Kingdom Come,” the epic story years in the making, springing from KINGDOM COME! Not a hoax! Not a dream! Not an imaginary story! Welcome the newest member to the Justice Society of America: the Kingdom Come Superman! Coming from an Earth plagued by heroes-gone-extreme, how will this Superman react to an incarnation of the Justice Society he never knew? This Superman’s world needed better heroes.
So does ours." Does this mean we can finally acknowledge the guy who looks exactly like Kingdom Come Superman as Kingdom Come Superman? Or are we leaving open the possibility that it is a massive coincidence? 70.144.181.182 00:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A conclusion made by an individual user constitutes original research. We can present facts, but we cannot synthesize them.(user: Zythe)01:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And try to be a tad more polite, pls. We aren't suggesting that the Superman in question isn't why you say he is; we are saying that we need a citation identifying him as such. Without it, it cannot go in. It's that simple. What you are proposing is OR by synthesis, and that cannot be utilized. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 01:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Woops, sorry for any impolite tone... I was just trying to more formal so it wouldn't sound like I was arbitrarily... arbitrating.)~ZytheTalk to me! 02:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Wasn't talking to you, Zythe. Anyway, I kinda said what I needed to about the subject. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: That Superman

message: We are going to wait to change the article's name after #26 comes out, right? --CmdrClow 08:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name Change

message: Um, isn't WrestlingLover420 the guy who has been banned for using sockpuppets (1) all over the place? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I storngly disagree with arcaynes approach here.  I as well as several other administrators, as discussed at WP:ANI have agreed he should have a second chance.  Please hold back the branding irons, torches and pitchforks as I work with this editor.  Thanks! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you are entitled to disagree. While i was a bit uncivil in my characterization of the editor in question, it's hard to have a lot of faith in people who sock. But since he was given another chance by them, so will I. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't believe it's appropriate to censor this discussion.  It was a valid concern raised by another editor of this article, and it plausibly needed a public explanation.  There's no reason to remove this discussion now, considering that you have the opportunity to pursue positive editing and discussion with others. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit conflict):::No. You were banned, and the community deserves to know, so as to be on guard for any future problems. As Chris told you, you have a long road ahead of you; addressing the retience of others is part of that, not sidestepping it as if it never existed. I won't comment on your past anymore, but the comment reflected the editorial working environment for the article. The other editors have a right to AGF, but not be amnesiac in their interactions with you. Good luck on your future edits, and I think this closes the topic for now. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Lord Sesshomaru
I guess its cool i dont really care if its here or not almost everybody knows my past anyway and my future here is gonna be great :)Wrestlinglover420 18:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Banned User

message: Why are the ref numbers 18. and 19. of that section blank? I counldn't figure it out, can somebody look into it? Lord Sesshomaru
:They're basically for Countdown 40 and 39 but they need to be referenced further up for them to show...~ZytheTalk to me! 20:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes and references section