FANDOM

SforHope

aka SalazarKnight

Admin
  • I was born on August 16
  • Bio Find me on YouTube: SalazarKnight
  • [Show More]
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • SforHope,

    I am attempting to assemble a reading order for myself for Jason Todd as Robin. According to the wiki, Earth-One's Jason Todd's last appearance is supposedly Batman Vol 1 400, with the cover date of October, 1986. The wiki also says that New Earth's Jason Todd's first appearance as Batman Vol 1 408. However, there are a number of issues where NE Jason is listed as being the Jason in the issue...but they were published between #400 and #408.

    I understand the other characters in these issues (such as #401-403) are also listed as New Earth characters, and I figure their being NE characters may be part of why Jason is listed as the NE version. But still, I need some help figuring out a proper reading order. Is it that #408 is the first chronological appearance because it's a flashback issue? It's not listed as flashback, but I am trying to figure this split out. I am somewhat confused here.

    Could you be of help? I am trying to figure out the appearance order between the cover dates of October, 1986, and October, 1987, for Jason Todd. I am trying to have the list transition between Earth-One and New Earth as seamlessly as possible.

    Thank you, N8

      Loading editor
    • View all 7 replies
    • The "crossover trend", as I like to call it, started in late 1981-early 1982. The first instance of this being Detective Comics #510 as the continuity of the story is further developed in Batman #344 and then it goes back to Detective Comics #511.

      This storytelling device was used until the very end of the Bronze Age (or Earth-One continuity) in 1986 and 90% of the time, it is mandatory that you read those stories alternating between Batman and Detective. Otherwise, it simply wouldn't make any sense.

      That's probably the biggest hurdle people find when going back to that era. Readers must alternate between series and for current lazy readership, it's too much of a hassle to make sense of the reading order. Which is a shame because the creative team of the time is phenomenal. Dick Giordano and Len Wein (editors); Gerry Conway and Doug Moench (writers); Don Newton and Gene Colan (artists)!! I mean, come on!

        Loading editor
    • Good to know. I am certainly willing to read the issues in alteration, but I wanted to clarify the necessity. I will keep all of this in mind when I am buying and reading these issues.

      Thanks a lot for all of this help. It has been a productive day.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I know it's a bit of a stretch but instead of putting collected editions under a "Notes" subsection on issue pages we make a new subsection called Collections, and not just issues but also annuals‎, one shots‎, 80-page giant specials, digital comics‎, free comic books‎ and even silent issues.

      Loading editor
    • View all 12 replies
    • What kind of navboxes were you thinking of?

        Loading editor
    • Funnily enough, I put notes in the Notes section. I personally don’t see the point of listing what trades the issue was collected in, even with a link. If I want to find an issue I want to read I buy the issue. I’ll usually end up buying the whole run as well, so I’ll do a minimal amount of research on the internet to suss out my options.

      I prefer to add actual notes to Notes like editorial errors, such as those early issues where Alan Grant calls Harry Matthews “Harry Andrews” or how he changes the original spelling of Ran Va Daath. Pointing out when dead Lanterns mysteriously show up again or the constant inconsistencies with Lobo’s duribilty and healing qualities are also things I would want to read about in Notes, so that’s what I add.

      Trivia is for trivia. Recording interesting facts about characters, pointing out homages/pastiches, and explaining inside gags.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Can you do me a solid?

    I’ve just bought some more trades and wanted to finally add Lnightfall as well, but I’m confused as the two omnibuses (Vol 2 and 3) I was looking at dont seem to have an obvious Vol 1. It’s probably out of production but even on eBay and another national online store I can’t discern which is the correct Vol 1 omnibus as the issues included seem to overlap. I’m hoping the information is just wrong but I don’t want to risk buying two trades only to find out the first just overlaps.

    Check out fishpond.co.nz and search “knightfall omnibus” and it comes up with only three options, but I would like your opinion if the first volume is indeed before the second two.

      Loading editor
    • I'm baffled as well. The Vol 1 Omnibus that shows up in fishpond apparently collects every book in Knightfall and all Prodigal as well. What I find strange is that, to my knowledge, DC has not published such omnibus. All collected editions of that storyline have always been in 3 volumes.

      These are the collections so far:

      Based on that, the results from fishpond for Vols 2 & 3 match those of the new edition collection and Vol 1 seems to be all 3 volumes of the Omnibus publication.

      I mean, if I were you, I'd go for the digital version instead; but since I know you like your comics on papyrus scrolls, I'd go for the first volume listed since it claims it has it all. I'd also double check their refund policy...

        Loading editor
    • Figured it out by cross checking the ISBN codes across theee sites. Looks like fishpond just has the wrong issue numbers listed.

        Loading editor
    • Have fun and do let me know what you think of the iconic storyline once you are done with it.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I am trying to add characters to the Swamp Thing pages but Tupka217 keeps deleting them. What should I do?

      Loading editor
    • Not add them again. We've been over this.

        Loading editor
    • He told me to add all the characters in the story in a message, and give detailed synopsis. Which I am trying to do. I haven't reinserted Anna, but I have been adding in other characters.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • You may or may not have noticed that I have only been making one Discussion post (the year ones) every day. I'm keeping the number of my posts/comments synchronized with the year of each post. Because of this, I have had to miss out on a lot of discussions I have wanted to take part in.

    I'll just get right to the point. Is there anything in FANDOM's Terms of Use or even our own wiki's guidelines that don't allow for a user to have multiple accounts? I've read the Terms of Use several times and I haven' seen anything.

    I know it's not allowed for vandals who just are ban evading, but what about regular users?

    I'd only use it for a few weeks. When I'm finished with my posts, I'd leave it.

      Loading editor
    • If you've read Fandom's ToU several times, you are already more up-to-date than me. As for our guidelines, I don't think there's anything about using multiple accounts.

      Honest advice, I'd say just post, man. But if it's really important to you, then by all means get yourself another account. I don't really mind. Tupka on the other hand...

        Loading editor
    • I either get another account or I'd have to ask an admin/mod to delete one of my old posts every time I wanted to make a new one.

      I'll just make another account. Like I said, I'm not ban-evading or spam-editing.

        Loading editor
    • The general practice is it's allowed as long as you don't present yourself as two different people, evade a ban, etc.

      Acceptable second accounts, for example, are bots, or if you want to be known under different names in a Star Trek and Game of Thrones community. Or you don't want anyone to know you edit that saucy schoolgirl anime wiki.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey there, I was having a chat with Tupka in the hopes of utilizing the "titans" URL for a wiki covering the upcoming TV series Titans. He didn't take issue with it, but suggested I consult the other admins. Would you have a problem with this?

      Loading editor
    • I'm going to be absolutely honest with you. I have no issue whatsoever with changing the URL. But that is mainly because I have no control over it. The two admins that can actually change it are MrBlonde267 (Chief Admin) and Jamie (Founder). They are the ones you should talk to, but a friendly warning is that they are against that, regardless of the other admins opinions.

        Loading editor
    • I'd rather just keep the discussion in one place and emphasize how right S is, you have to talk to those two.

      I'm more of a neutral opinion, like Tupka. I'm not a no, but my main hold up is there's no real benefit to us giving up the url besides out of the goodness of our hearts. If you had a strong persuasive argument to sell MrBlonde or Jamie as to why we should give it up, I think that's more a discussion.

        Loading editor
    • I kind of agree with Harold here.

        Loading editor
    • Apologies for the multiple discussions, I just figured that placing one message might not attract the other admins, as seemed to be the case with the message on Tupka's wall, so I just went for the most recently active.

      I'd have to say if anything I fail to see why removing one redirected URL from your arsenal could really disadvantage you, as you guys are plenty big and renowned. Of course, it is a matter of you guys simply being kind, so I do request this respectfully.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Should a page be created for this reference book for Bats? I own it so I'll be able to provide the content firsthand. It's a pretty lengthy book, but I'll finish it...eventually.

      Loading editor
    • View all 19 replies
    • Have you heard of Rachel Green, Bruce's attorney? She is listed (in the book, not the wiki) as having an appearance in Batman #585, but the page only mentions "Wayne's attorney." Should she get a red link or plain text?

      She's also mentioned as being the attorney who assists in Dick's adoption and Bruce's trial over the whole Vesper Fairchild affair.

        Loading editor
    • Yep. She was introduced in the prelude to the Bruce Wayne: Murderer/Fugitive storyline. I had to look it up though, because her role is minimal. I included her appearances in the storyline because I intended to read some of the books prior to that, to learn more about the character than just her failed attempt to save Bruce from prison and to see if she really deserves a page.

      I haven't come to that yet and it might take a while. I'll leave it to your judgement. Regardless of what you include (text or link), I might change it eventually.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello, I've already added the collection "Rules of Engagement" to Batman Vol 3 site and it goes to the storyline "Rules of Engagement" from Batman Confidential.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Did you see the last edit? Just wondering if the changes were accurate. They weren’t cited.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Howdy! I'm Corbin and it is a pleasure to be here.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message