Talk:Continuity changes during Infinite Crisis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Edit the article attached to this page or discuss it at the project talk page. Help with current tasks, or visit the notice board.
???	This article has no rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and provide comments here.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Continuity changes during Infinite Crisis article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 Subsequent continuity changes 2 Wording 3 Citations 4 Martian Manhunter and DIck Grayson 5 Booster continuity 6 Shazam! The New Beginning

[edit] Subsequent continuity changes

I'm not sure about the "Subsequent continuity changes" section because this article is about changes during IC. However, I'm adding it for now because people have already started adding things like the Ventriloquist's retcon back from the grave (only to be killed again) to this article. Wryspy 05:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Even if it is not mentioned in the miniseries or the tie-ins, changes will still be attributed to the event, which is what I understand this article to be about.--Chris Griswold 10:26, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Continuity errors are not deliberate continuity changes attributed to Infinite Crisis. Doczilla 08:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree. --Chris Griswold 08:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Dan Didio states in this interview (also mentioned in the Hypertime article, that "The great part about Crisis is that all mistakes and retcons are time anomalies", indicating that Crisis is held responsible for everything, including "Editorial retcons".Rhindle The Red 15:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

One blanket remark like that does not mean we should start inserting speculation or listing every continuity change not directly attributable to IC. Nothing in the stories ever showed that Max's change was anything but a writer/editor decision. You're right that those changes can be attributed to IC in the way DiDio says, but the source material has never said so. DiDio's opinion does not make it official. Because writers and editors have been disagreeing with each other outside the comics about what changes have happened in the DCU, we go by what is shown in the comics. Plus, DiDio is not quite right in terms of sheer logic. Not all retcons are time anomalies. They can't be, and they don't have to be. Doczilla 16:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Good points as usual. They've been disagreeing with each other? Please point me toward some of this; it's really interesting. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 16:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The specific example that immediately comes to mind has to do with the Matrix-Supergirl's place in continuity. An editor said she retroactively never existed. A writer said yes, she did. After another Wikipedia contributor mentioned this, I looked up the articles and saw that it was true. I'll see if I can find the links for you, and not just to satisfy curiosity. This is a critical point when we have to consider when we discuss whether or not to include editorial confirmation when listed things like deaths, etc. Doczilla 16:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

That was easy. I found those links in Wikipedia's Supergirl article, at the end of Matrix's section. Doczilla 17:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I see what you are referring to, although those stances don't necessarily contradict one another. What it means is that while Linda Danvers was Supergirl, Matrix/Earth Angel stuff has been taken out of the equation. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 17:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess that's possible, but the articles seem to treat "Linda Danvers" as synonymous for "Matrix." When asked a question about whether Linda Danvers was ever Supergirl, DiDio sure seems to reply that she wasn't. Anyway, when we have trouble enough interpreting interview remarks, this still illustrates our point that we need to stick to what we read in the source material. Doczilla 17:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC) Well, we at least try to. The Booster Gold item required editorial confirmation. Doczilla 17:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

What Booster Gold item? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 17:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The first thing listed under Superboy-Prime's changes, about Booster's marital status. DC Crisis Counseling is our reference specifying that his marriage has been retconned away. I suppose that's closer to being official than stray interviews are. DC people seem consistent in their agreement that the "Formerly Known As..." stuff didn't happen. Doczilla 18:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wording

"Batwoman (Kathy Kane) alive again, now a redheaded lesbian." just feels funny. --Chris Griswold 16:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Do we actually know that this is a continuity change and not the introduction of a new character during 52...? CovenantD 17:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Good question. And yes, it's a continuity change. Many, many news reports and DC announcements have said she is Kathy Kane. Chris: Yeah, the "now a redheaded lesbian" part was screwy, but it was just fun to say once. Obviously her hair could have been dyed black back then or red now. The lesbian part would sure seem to count as a continuity change. Or it could be or a retcon if she was always secretly gay but didn't feel free to come out of the closet back in the 50's and 60's, and that's why the Earth-2 Batman married Catwoman instead of her. (I am kidding, by the way.) Incidentally, it was Earth-1's Batwoman who got murdered in 1979. I don't think Earth-2's got mentioned again after that. Wryspy 08:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Some sections do not indicate what change occured, for instance "The various incarnations of the Legion of Super-Heroes since the first Crisis." Something happened, but it is merely listed as change. This does not currently make sense.

[edit] Citations

For characters who returned from the dead under Subsequent changes, I think it would be helpful to cite the issues in which they returned. Of those three, however, the only one for whom I personally know the issue is Batwoman (52 #11 according to Attack of the Show and press releases). Who's the Lynx? Wryspy 02:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martian Manhunter and DIck Grayson

Where do we put the new origin for MM's aversion to fire (DC: Brave New World) and Dick Grayson's no longer being adopted by Bruce Wayne (Batman #654)?--Chris Griswold 19:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

If those belong in this article at all, those would go under "Subsequent changes attributed to IC". Dick's no longer having been adopted by Bruce is a reverting to what had been the standard for decades until one author wrote a story about that adoption, a story that clearly contradicted past history. I distinctly remember WAY back (pre-Crisis) when Bruce adopted Jason, he and Dick had a conversation about why Bruce never adopted Dick.

As for MM's fire thing, has the origin for that aversion been stated since 1985? If not, then this not be the post-Infinite Crisis origin, it could be the post-Crisis on Infinite Earths version for all we know, even if it's never been mentioned in the intervening twenty years. Oy! It makes the head swim. Wryspy 00:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind about Dick; I was going off of something Ipstenu has been saying, about Dick no longer being adopted. But it's not said in the comic that Dick was never adopted, just that he was Wayne's ward, which he always had been. It doesn't contradict. He appraently adopts Dick in Gotham Knights #21.

The entire Martian race had the vulnerability to fire instilled in them genetically by the Guardians of the Galaxy. It's in JLA by Joe Kelly, and it's mentioned in the MM article. DCU: Brave New World, however, shows it to be a result of MM's sadness when his people are all dead. --Chris Griswold 15:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I haven't read Brave New World yet. If its content contradicts the JLA explanation, then yes, that goes under "Subsequent changes..." Wryspy 18:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Booster continuity

AFAIK, the "Formerly Known As..." stories aren't official canon, and therefore, Booster was never really married as far as DC continuity is concerned. Is there anything one way or the other on this? MSJapan 03:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's already the first item listed under Superboy-Prime's Changes. Doczilla 17:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

So, if those stories aren't canon, why is it that, when looking at images of what Booster calls 'his league', Mary Marvel is one of them? She was only ever a member in those two stories. Lokicarbis 12:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Since the Formerly Known As stories never happened, the characters did something else with that time instead, some as-yet-unpublished adventures. Doczilla 17:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I think they are official cannon, they were published by DC, with no indicia of any imprint and no disclaimer about this "not official canon" theory. If things changed we're gonna have to accept the Superboy Punches as explanation, as Dan Didio said himself in Crisis Counseling: "Q: Is Booster still married to Gladys or did Superboy Prime get her too? DD: Gladys is gone, one of the few good things Superboy Prime’s “wall punching” accomplished." Ketin Porta 15:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shazam! The New Beginning

It always bothered me that Ordway just overlooked Captain Marvel's origin with The Power Of Shazam!, so I'm theorizing that it's just another Superboy Punch. I think the same could explain the "never happened" about Sovereign Seven. Ketin Porta 15:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)