Allen Adams[]
Seems tad excessive with having two "Allen Adams". Furthermore, I firmly believed that the Allen Adam in Final Crisis is the same as the "Pax Americana" Allen Adam regardless of how New 52 throw continuity out of the frakking window! Also, there is the Earth-20 characters that did briefly appeared in Final Crisis: Superman Beyond, but they do not re-designate as "Earth 20" (without hyphens) unlike the "Earth 4" characters, and so how come they (Earth-20) don't get the same treatment as the "Earth 4" characters? Or why not go with the same treatment with Kalel (Earth 23)?--Drgyen (talk) 00:57, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
- They're exactly the same. I'm guessing whoever made it was not aware of our policy, or the other existing page. --Tupka217 11:18, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
- Merge? Delete? --- Haroldrocks talk 13:34, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
- Which page title should be kept Earth 4 or Earth-4? --Painocus (talk) 03:33, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, going by Kalel (Earth 23), it should be Earth 4. I'll start merging the old article into this one. --Painocus (talk) 03:45, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- Kalel (Earth 23) was named that way because his number was never attested before, so that's an incorrect precedent. Kent Nelson (Earth-20) still retains the hyphen. --Tupka217 10:09, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm going to side with hyphen. It seems that this (Earth 4) Adam is just a reappearance of the (Earth-4) one. No need to complicate things. I suggest merging to the original. --- Haroldrocks talk 11:53, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- I have already merged them into "Earth 4", but I can switch them if you guys don't have time. --Painocus (talk) 17:41, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- Due to Drgyen's "Or why not go with the same treatment with Kalel (Earth 23)?" and everyone agreeing to merging without objecting to that I was under the impression that a consensus had been reached, but that no one had gotten around to doing it yet. (I made the first reply before making that assumption.) Since both pages already existed merging would have to be done this way anyways, right? (Expect for deleting one of the pages outright, but that would destroy the changelog as well.) --Painocus (talk) 19:27, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
- You're new here... you wouldn't know it usually takes us 2 weeks to reach some sort of consensus, then the discussion goes cold, it gets bumped, and then we decide on the complete opposite. That's our usual method :).
- But having checked the edit history of the other page, for most of that, especially powers, the new page is better, so there's no real need to smash the edit histories back together. --Tupka217 11:14, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for being so understanding. I will be more careful in the future. --Painocus (talk) 00:56, December 17, 2014 (UTC)
Better image in Multiversity Guidebook[]
The current image with panels is completely unnecessary. The comic panel doesn't look good especially in the disambiguation. I think the Multiversity Guidebook image will be better. Currently the one we have, its length is too small. I can create a more square image for better ratio. Other heroes will be visible but I don't think that's a problem since he seems easily recognizable and even if someone doesn't recognize him somehow, one will easily know from the infobox or the article after learning about him. MatteJohnny (talk) 18:40, July 29, 2020 (UTC)
- To be honest, I'm not a big fan of any of the images we have but the current one at least focuses only on him. The Guidebook image could pass if it were the only image but they aren't ideal. As you say he's "easily recognizable" but that's only if you're familiar with the character. Infobox images, as much as possible, should be a quality image that best represents the character's appearance to someone unfamiliar with them. A group shot does a poor job of that. Kyletheobald (talk) 12:13, August 3, 2020 (UTC)
- Understood. MatteJohnny (talk) 20:10, August 3, 2020 (UTC)