Talk:Batman/Archive 2

message: This archive page covers approximately the dates between November 2005 and December 2005.
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/Archive03. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Dyslexic agnostic 07:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

message: I agree with the tag that this article is way too long now.  Although I think most of this can be remedied by makign the text more conscise in certain areas, especially in descriptions of links to other articles.  A similar problem exists with the Superman article. WesleyDodds 17:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not to split it into Batman (comics) and Batman (character) parts? Samohyl Jan 03:23, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that would be best, because it's largely two sides of the same coin.  Probably creating seperate articles for things like Batman in other media or Batman bibliography would be better.  WesleyDodds 03:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Done.  Now 46 kb. Dyslexic agnostic 23:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article length 

message: Well, I have taken the liberty of reducing the "love interests" and "character parts", by creating Supporting characters of Batman (just like previously Enemies of Batman was created. The important names still appear with wikis to most of their own articles, so all relevant content is still only a click away.  I do agree with hiving off the Batman in Other Media and Batman Bibliography into another section. Dyslexic agnostic 10:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Now 46 kb. Dyslexic agnostic 23:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: DA's reductions

message: Lesfer put the "very long" notice back up.  I just reduced Batman from 84 kb to 45 kb... What more should I do? Dyslexic agnostic 23:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Batman too long still? 

message: Bill Finger gets no "official credit" for Bats? He named Bruce Wayne, suggested the scalloped cape & "whiteout" eyes, & conceived the Batcave. (He also went a bit batty naming "bat-things," it's true...) Also, any comment on Bats' rel to Rorschach? I mean, it's been suggested Bats is the real guy, & Bruce is the disguise; as he says in JLI, "Underneath, I'm hideous." (OK, he could've been joking, but--Bats, joking?) BTW, I'm N a fan, so I'm N qualified to xam the ish, just raising it. (For the record, his worst enemy? JLI; "I should never come out in the daytime.")  Trekphiler 16:35, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assorted stuff 

message: Made some changes to the Evolution of the Concept section, specifically the last four paragraphs. Tightened up the prose in the year one paragraph, also talked a little bit more about WHY it was significant. Seemed strange to me to have a grocery list of other stories set in the year one era, but I'm new here and didn't want to delete anyone else's stuff. Same thing with the next paragraph -- it said 'Killing Joke is contriversial', then totally skipped over the contriversal part. I'm not particularly happy with the text though. Made similar revisions to the Jason Todd paragraph.
-Simnel
: Simnel, thanks for the changes.  However, this section needs a major trim.  The lengthy considerations of DKR, Batman: Year One and the Killing Joke are unnecessary given that each has its own article, and it takes away from the Batman article to dealve so deeply in these stories.  A one or two liner about each should suffice, and the "good" parts of what is now there moved to their respective subarticles. Just my opinion, but no time to do it right now.  Batman, after reduction from 84 kb to 45 kb, is slowly growing again, whereas it should probably be sitting at 30 kb max. Dyslexic agnostic 19:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evolution of the Concept 

message: "There is a strong -- and relatively explicitly shown -- suggestion that the Joker does this, in part, by showing Gordon pictures of his daughter being crippled and raped (Evolution of the concept)."
I have a little bit of beef with this line: I went and re-read the graphic novel and no rape was obvious. Now, I understand that perhaps showing that would be too harsh for any writer of any graphic novel to do, but I do still greatly doubt that the Joker had raped Barbara Gordon, but rather undressed her and put her in provocative positions (please take into account that some serial killers don't rape their victims, but wait until their dead, take a picture, and masturbate over their bodies).
The whole point was to turn James Gordon nutty, Barbara was just as a means of getting that response.
Also, this is the Joker we're talking about: his sexuality is very much in question because he seems asexual, shown by his lack of sexual interest in Harley Quinn, or any other woman (or man for that matter), as well as his non-sexual crimes (he goes for no particular gender, and it is only thin speculation that he has raped). 
Whether his lack of sexuality is because of his obsession with the Batman, his battle with insanity, his possible surpression of homosexuality (which I doubt), or perhaps he is asexual, the idea that the Joker rapes is very unfitting to his character. He might put a person in a place where there is a high chance that person can be raped, but I doubt he'd do it himself.
:Agreed, there was no real evidence of it occuring, and Im sure Barbara would have mentioned it by now if it did.--DrBat 23:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Batman: The Killing Joke... "Rape"? 

message: I just noticed that the "N." was correctly removed from "Bruce N. Wayne" on the article. I'm not sure who originally put the "N." in the name, but I thought I should point out for posterity's sake that "Bruce N. Wayne" is a private detective cousin of Bruce Wayne after whom Batman's secret identity was named, but the Batman Bruce Wayne's middle initial—if any actually exists—has never been revealed. His full name—until a middle name or middle initial is "revealed" in the comics—should be simply "Bruce Wayne" without the N. Kaijan 05:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bruce N. Wayne

message: Bruce’s IQ being at least 230 seems pretty unrealistic. While I understand Bats is most certainly a genius, plus being a fictional character that certain liberties may be taken, it seems like this figure (possibly from Wizard) is the result of exaggerated fandom. (Anyone who’s been to Batman fan message boards knows that some of his militant fanboys find him completely infallible and unable to be defeated) While I’m a huge Batman fan, I dislike it when his abilities are inflated. Wizard has been known to print inaccurate figures regarding heroes, and would like to see something close to being “official” regarding his intelligence. However, I would like to see what the rest of the WikiProject Comics community thinks before taking action in the article. (If anyone would like to talk to me about talk page policy, please feel free, as this is my first time posting in one.) Thanks. Arcanum7Arcanum7Arcanum7
You did perfectly fine using the talk page. I think it's a good idea to simply state that Batman is of genius intelligence. The whole IQ bit, despite the controversy of IQ accuracy in the real world, is impossible to pin down unless stated by the creator. Ereinion 01:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Scarecrow, are you a total geek, or do you just play one on TV?  Don't say that thing about how most people only use x% of their brain... that's a fallacy. Dyslexic agnostic 09:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Batman's Intelligence/IQ 

message: Removed this line:
The Batcave's utilities consist of unknown Wayne Tech technology along with Thangarian,                Martian, Apokoliptan, and Kryptonian technology;"Plus the really scary crap Bruce invented" as Oliver Quenn, Green Arrow,said.
Basically because, well, it's not true. The quote was made by Green Arrow during Identity Crisis about the security systems designed for the civilian homes of League members, NOT about the Batcave. Simnel 23:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Batcave 

message: We must address the Earth-Two Batman history!!!!! Dyslexic agnostic 06:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to differ with you, the Earth-Two Batman is important, even more so given the current reconsideration of the DC Multiverse. This is a version of the Batman that married, had a child, and died, all very much part of DC continuity pre-Crisis. The fact that is predates you is not a reason not to include it.  But I agree it would be SHORT, and pithy.  I also have to state that I don't know enough to add it myself yet.  Dyslexic agnostic 08:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Earth-Two

message: In the Batman in other media section, it is suggested that Spawn is an Image riff on Batman. Shadowhawk, perhaps, but can anyone give a shred of proof (or even conjecture!) that Spawn takes anything from Batman other than a love of Gothic archetecture? Simnel 22:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry, i tried though. i knew i could turn out that you know more than me. even if not, i've been a hardcore fan for 13 years, so for some i coud be a gurru and for some i could be a newby. i'm sorry, but if it is not through the author's experience, background, context and his major influences, i got nothing. The charcater is grim, which was a common thing in the 80's-early90's...have batman-esque looks, but he is an anti-heroe... so you are right altho similarities are obvious and just there, the missing thing is a mcfralane statement. kinda like the batman-the shadow or batman-superman's oppositething... no word on internet though...and thinking abuout, not even a guy more expereienced with comics than both of us together could answer, it'd gotta be from a mcfarlane linked source. I'm sorry i dissaponted you--T for Trouble-maker 08:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spawn? 

message: Given Wikipedia:Verifiability I would ask that this text from the section Homosexual interpretations be sourced, please:
:The outcry particularly affected Batman comics for a number of years; the characters of Bat-Girl and Batwoman were introduced to "prove" that Batman and Robin were not gay, and the stories took on a campier, lighter feel.
:Despite Wertham and "The Code," the theme of ambiguous sexuality continued to be played upon by both the studios and the readers until the late sixties, when changing public morality necessitated an official split between Batman and any suggestion of sexuality with his young friend. Denny O'Neil separated the two heroes in 1969 by sending Dick Grayson to college, and female characters were eventually brought in as more "proper foils" to the main hero.
:Despite the studio's efforts, popular culture and a number of artists continue to play off the homosexual connotation of their relationship. In summer of 2005, painter Mark Chamberlain displayed a number of watercolors depicting both Batman and Robin in suggestive poses. The studio threatened both the artist and the galleries with legal action if they did not cease selling the works, and also demanded that all remaining art as well as any profits be handed over as well.
Could someone also clarify who/what is meant by the term "studio" in the above text. Thanks in advance, Hiding  talk 16:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points, Hiding.  The recent edit wars may be averted in the future with some verification of the above. Let me look... Dyslexic agnostic 17:21, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The “how abut having the info in the CCA article, where it fit’s better with a proper mega as-big-as-U-want introduction-link here?” issue was never answered... Anyways, the influence of Wertham can’t be denied, at least in my opinion. The O’Neil thing could loose credibility without a quote of him saying so. It is also common knowledge among Batman fans that Catwoman (the most famous Batman love interest) and Vicky Vale were there way before these events; and it's not like Batwoman, the Batgirls, Silver, Talia and Julie (not to mention all the bad Bat-girls created for the 60’s series) were not going to happen anyway. To me, Wertham’s influence was stronger with the violence issue due to the CCA.--T for Trouble-maker 18:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't understand a word you just said... and stop stalking me. Dyslexic agnostic 19:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Dammit, not in front of the others you dyslexic jerk, we're never going to gain our cred back if you keep doing this. I told you already, you moron, mark my errors and send it back to me, you whinning ass. hahaha. And stop copying me 4 X's-sake!!!--T for Trouble-maker 05:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wha..? Dyslexic agnostic 06:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: hahahahahaha. just kidding. But seriously: (moved to next section)
--T for Trouble-maker 10:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Reduce the size?  Proportionally bigger?  What are you trying to say here, T-Man? Dyslexic agnostic 10:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing the Homosexual interpretations section