Template talk:Batman/Archive 01

message: Nice continuing work on this. I'm wondering if you and I can't braistorm a list of relevantly important storylines on here first, and then really work through which are MOST important. For example, Knightfall was added for it's significance as it was intended to be the end of bruce wayne and the start of a successor as the bat, but fans hated it, and bruce came back. Cataclysm is good, but recent, and most of it's effects are gone. Let's see what we can come up with? ThuranX 17:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazing how this section got a ton of editing, and no discussion. why, it's like I'm not even involved since WP:CMC came in to 'save me from myself'ThuranX 18:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storylines 

message: I'm putting it above the references/sources/outside links, like the superman template is on it's pages... ThuranX 15:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  placement? 

message: Do we really need to denote continuities?--Chris Griswold 00:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuities 

message: The "see also" section in Batman (which this template has replaced nicely) used to include links to Super Friends, Justice League (TV series) and Justice League Unlimited.  Should this template include them?  I can see arguments for and against: on the one hand, these were widely viewed television series which featured Batman prominently; on the other hand, we probably don't want to include every comic series in which Batman has featured prominently, and it might be odd to be selective about the comics and inclusive about television.  What do others think? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't include them at first due to both space, and relevance. The Superman Template likewise rejected these. I'd suggest instead that a JLA template could include these. Hrmmm.... I'll think about it... hehehe... ThuranX 14:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon reflection, I suppose that the JLA series don't really need to be in this template. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I am opposed. Supergirl at least had Jimmy Olsen, directly mentioned Superman, and was produced by the same evil men. --Chris Griswold 08:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: When I first assembled this, I opted to avoid Catwoman because it specifically was NOT in any Batman-related continuity. Likewise, despite the amazing quality of Sandy Collora's projects, I didn't include fan films. (I am working on a template for them, give me a little time, though, LOL). ThuranX 14:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about other series starring Batman? 

message: Two editors from the WP:COMICS have come here with the intent of blanking major quantities of content. I will continue to revert their edits and ignore their 'messages' to me that they are working in good faith based on a consensus they arrived at on another tlak page, not that of Template:The Batman. they call me uncivil and rude and so on, but they cna't be bothered to discuss their 'good faith edits', instead continuing to vandalize the page. I have reached by 3 reverts though, and have no doubt these two will report it immediately, so I'm hoping that other editors interested in actually IMPROVING the page will help me protect the page.ThuranX 16:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody is blanking anything, and this "sky is falling attitude" isn't helpful at all. Please don't berate people for not using this talk page, then berate them when they do use this talk page. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Okay, I soaked as much whitespace out of it as I could without losing links (with one exception). Numbered for ease of discussion...
#I added Batwoman, and waffled on Ace the Bat-Hound and Bat-Mite. I still think we're a little thin on supporting characters; how do people feel about Oracle, Azrael, Spoiler, or individual listings for the Robins? Markeer makes a good point about reducing the characters.
# I added Killer Croc and Clayface (and Solomon Grundy, as he's a Gotham villain, but good call on the removal there; he really is more of a GL villain). How should we arrange the villains? Are there too many, or are we missing any? I'm kind of iffy on Bane; he's more like Hush or Prometheus or the Reaper or Carmine Falcone in that he has one really big story, then he's sort of relegated to the background.
# I condensed the places and miscellanea and added the Bat-Signal. Places is never going to be any longer, and Miscellanea just fit, filling in that whitespace. Does someone have a better name?
#I added a ton of influential people to the list. Besides the creators, I added all of the really influential writers and artists on Batman (not all the famous ones, just the ones who formed Batman). Does Jeph Loeb belong on this list? While Jim Lee has pretty much defined the look of Batman in the comics of the last three or so years, Loeb has just written a lot of really good stories. I'm not sure his work is definitive, or that we can really tell if it's definitive yet. In fact, does Jim Lee belong? Ah, indecision.
#I condensed the movie and animation sections; this is discussed above.
#I added Death in the Family and Killing Joke. I waffled on DK2, and I really don't think we need all of the Sale/Loeb Year One followups (Long Halloween, for example), as they're critically acclaimed, but not yet particularly influential.
#I just ditched the video games. Only one Batman game ever has been a critical success, and none of them have ever been a sales success. Additionally, all of the games that were there were adaptations of movies.
#We don't have a section on influential people outside of the comics. I don't know what to name it, but I'd say Adam West, Paul Dini, Bruce Timm, whoever voiced Batman in the animated series, Tim Burton, Joel Schumacher, and Christopher Nolan would belong on it at least. Definitely major directors and people who have become typecast as Batman, but not the one-off actors who played Batman in various movies.
#I waffled on what to do with the cancelled movies. Why are they in this template at all?
Okay. Commence the yell...er...discussion. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shrunk it down 

message: I suggest protecting this page for a day or so to stop the rv war.  This will allow for discussion and maybe for some people to back away and calm down. --Silver lode 20:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: nah, there's no need for that. I think AMiB jsut needs to accept that he's not the only one who can be bold, and sometimes, when other editors are being bold, it will change things he's worked hard on. He doesn't mind BEING bold, just SEEING bold. he'll learn this is just making him a stronger editor. And while I appreciate the revert, if you'll notice above, Basique and I agreed to shorten the page. I'd appreciate you undoing your revert. After all, isn't Wikipedia about being bold? That's my understanding of what happened here today, and I'm just trying to be a better wiki-editor. I've learned today that being bold is more important than manners, feelings, or respect. So please undo your revert. Otherwise, I'll have to be bold and do it myself. ThuranX 20:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: in that case, please feel free to revert it, I got lost in all the replies and mistakenly thought it was just cut down in an act of juvenile behaviour.  my appologies. --Silver lode 20:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Um. I actually don't really mind you deleting half the template, Thuran. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't particularly mind the smaller version Thuran set earlier either, but I think the larger version is a better working model for the moment.  If this becomes a reversion war, we have the option of creating two working templates and putting them up for a poll.  I don't believe protection will help anyone at the moment. -Markeer 21:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Not me. I think we can get it smaller though, if we submit the whole thing to TfD! let's try, it'll BE BOLD! Create an entire template, redo the whole thing while insulting the first group of editors, then delete it, all in a day! Like Performance art! Come on, let's do it! It'll be SOOOOO cool! ThuranX 21:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The small one seems fine, and has relevent info. --Silver lode 21:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The smaller one works.  Less comprehensive, but also very compact and unobtrusive, while providing a reader with links to related articles. -Markeer 21:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Was considering this myself. Good call. --Chris Griswold 04:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, this is probably best, I'm creating a case now.  Being one of the individuals involved in the original dispute I feel it would be inappropriate for me to make new edits on the template for awhile and I will try to be as objective as possible when creating this case. -Markeer 14:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Excellent. I have added a brief comment and taken a stab at a suggestion for conflict resolution. Guermantes 03:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: As shown here, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates/navboxes, it seems that there's some major confusion. See, i'd designed a TEMPLATE, while the users today thought they were designing a NAVBOX. Since these are obviously different, I've reverted to the last real template version. every edit after that really works to turn the TEMPLATE into a NAVBOX.ThuranX 04:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see my comments in reply to you there. This template always was a navbox, as was {tl|Superman}}, the navbox you based this template on. --Chris Griswold 05:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: see, now I'm so confused.  we are now back to the huge template for a navbox that has all that whitespace and huge amount of info?  I believe everyone, including you, decided that smaller was better, at least  that is what you chastized me earlier for.   I dont want you to think that im ganging up on you or whatever else has been said here at this talk page. Creating this template was a great idea, but it would be even greater if everyone's ideas could be used and incorporated.  This template (which I can only see as being used as a navbox...) will be used on quite a few batman related pages, and should not be so big as to overshadow or clog up the main page. I hope the rest of the editing can be done without personal attacks or grudges. --Silver lode 06:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't see where the Project holds any particular authority to set policy for wikipedia, esp. on an article created by someone who specifically rejects the project, it's members, their edits, and their behavior having seen how the project acts. Any wikipedian can edit any article. I will continue to edit this article as I see fit, and I believe Lenin & McCarthy probably will too. When the Project feels like STARTING a set of edits with civility, I suspect that I and other editors will be more willing to work with the project, but until then? No. The project does NOT assume good faith, nor do they act in a CIVIL manner. ThuranX 13:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, don't use personal attacks. This is getting to be a very heated discussion. AMIB and Markeer were trying to trim away what they felt was extraneous information from the navbox. --Toffile 15:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This entire action has been a personal attack. It started with Markeer's vandalism, and continued with AMiB's decision that my revision of vandalism was an attack, and his subsequent ignoring of any and all comments and attempts to be civil by me. I see you've already chosen sides, that's fine. ThuranX 15:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't chosen sides at all. I'm trying to calm everyone down.--Toffile 15:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure you ave. YOu came here and accused ME of being the problem. I'm NOT the problem. The peopel who came in here and tore things up and then insulted me for trying to be civil are the problem. They don't see it that way, and their buddies from WP:Comic don't see it that way, but it IS the truth of the matter!ThuranX 15:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for assuming good faith on my motives. I wasn't accusing you of a problem, actually part of that was my mistake because I misunderstood portion of your comment (I thought you were referring to AMIB and Markeer as Lenin and McCarthy, not realizing that there is a user with that name), and before I could correct it, you had replied.--Toffile 15:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PROBLEMS SOLVED!