Talk: DCnU

Post-Flashpoint DC Universe

This has been an extremely controversial issue on the site recently, so I'm centralizing discussion about it here. Since the end of Flashpoint and the beginning of the DCnU, a lot of people have been arguing about how we should best handle the new versions of the characters, and the site administrators have talked about it a lot. DC has explicitly stated that this is not a reboot, and we are going to continue using the same character pages that we have been doing. We will not use a new naming convention, or create new pages for the characters Post-Flashpoint. Instead, we will be addressing the changes on character pages using the in-universe information given. This has been discussed at length by the administrators, and it is not up for debate, but we are here to answer any questions that people might have regarding the transition. Much of this discussion has gone on in the DC Database chatroom. There are severals reasons why we are handling it this way, and I'm going to try and explain them as eloquently as possible.

• The stories are continued. Even though some characters are rebooting their histories, the DC Universe as a whole is continuing from where it left off. There are many old stories still in continuity, and comics from this month are mentioning stories as late in history as Brightest Day. It would make no sense to have pages for characters that are part of a massive wealth of history, and not have the pages connect to any of that history.
• We have always made an effort to cover comics from a historical perspective. It's important to remember that people also read comics that came out earlier than this month, and so our pages should reflect the wealth of these characters' histories instead of just whatever's happening this week. The goal of this site is to have depth of information that appeals to old readers, and accessibility that appeals to new readers. That also means not making things confusing for people who pick up a comic book from prior to 2011.
• Some editors have been concerned that the retcons will be too confusing for new readers, and nobody will be able to understand our character pages because of these changes. It is very easy to have both if you explain it well enough, and it is possible to do this concisely and articulately. Take a look at Bruce Wayne (New Earth)#Flashpoint for a good example of how this is used for present-day stories, where we are using the {{Post-Flashpoint}} template to distinguish the different eras in his history. Kal-El (New Earth)#Origins is a good example of how we are reflecting the current changes to talk about characters' origin stories.

We're hoping this transition can go as smoothly as possible, but we understand that some sections are going to require more work than others and there might be many more debates that spring up in the future. Users are encouraged to bring any disputes that they might have to the chatroom, as there are usually administrators there in the evening willing to help out with problems.

- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 00:27, September 29, 2011 (UTC)

Well, as I said I dislike use of the term 'DCnU'. I think referring to it as 'the New 52' or just simply 'the Post-Flashpoint DCU/New Earth' would be a superior nomenclature for it. --HED - HalfElfDragon 02:07, September 30, 2011 (UTC)

"We will not use a new naming convention, or create new pages for the characters Post-Flashpoint" -- Yes, I understand that this is not up for debate. And yes, I know that I'm pretty new to this Wikia, without a lot of updates under my proverbial belt. But I do feel the need to step up and say that I think that this is the wrong direction to go in.

If the New-52 is to be the direction of the DC Universe from here on out (and no, I don't care for the "DCnU" nomenclature either), it functions in effect as a new timeline. The same universe as the traditional DCU certainly, but a new timeline just the same. It DOES and WILL CONTINUE to diverge from the traditional DCU. And as time goes on and the new origins of characters are revealed, it will increasingly conflict with the established histories already written on character pages and become unwieldy to try to organize.

But fear not, I'll not be going off on my own crusade nor rewriting contrary to admin dictates. I just wanted to put it out there that I think this is a bad idea and why I think so. DigiFluid 15:12, October 4, 2011 (UTC)

I agree, for what little difference, if any, that makes.--HED - HalfElfDragon 07:33, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

This is a horrible decision to make. I am new to DC and all i care about is the Superman with a collar and red belt, not any of the 10000s of other alternate universes that i've seen. It look me ages to find ANY information on this "DCnU" Superman. The way i found any was by searching "The new 52," going to the appearing characters and finding a link to "New Earth" Superman. I UNDERSTAND that New Earth is still the same Universe as the one in The New 52, the only difference being someone went and changed history, but that does not give you the right to BURY information about the new universe under mountains of material completely useless to new readers. If you won't make new articles, make a new wikia and call it the dcnu wikia or something, because new readers like myself need a place where they can get to know the characters from DCnU without getting confused with all the crap from previous "universes" or timelines.

PizzaRolls 06:34, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Just because it's rebooted doesn't make older information "crap". It was all correct, at one point in history. We're here to document the entire history of the character, not just what happened in last week's comics. Superman has had a rich history of reboots, should we make separate pages on (Post-Birthright), (Post-Secret Origin), (Post-Flashpoint)? That would only confuse people even more. We've reached consensus on the matter, and quite frankly, calling things "crap" will not tip the balance in your favor.

As for navigation, the current incarnation of a character has top spot on the disambiguation page (with maybe a handful minor exceptions). I guess we can sort of cater to new readers by giving him a DCnU image on the DCnU page. --Tupka^{217 (talk|wall)} 08:25, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

I think, as a matter of form, it would be good on most character pages to force the TOC, and add in a DCnU heading within the history section, so that users can jump directly to it, without having to know in advance what flashpoint is and what it did. I've just done so on the superman page (though I know Billy thinks it's unnecessary). It's for convenience's sake, anyway. - Hatebunny 18:02, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

I agree on the TOC, though occasionally it has "Edit" included in the headers. How do we fix that? --Tupka^{217 (talk|wall)} 18:08, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

I actually think we should have articles on the DCnU characters. The timeline changed so much that it's a like new universe. The characters origins are different. DCnU is a different reality from New Earth, so why put DCnU information in New Earth articles? I think it would be be better to take out the DCnU information, and put it in articles such as Kal-El (DCnU), Diana of Themyscira (DCnU), Bruce Wayne (DCnU), Joker (DCnU), etc. I wouldn't accept that Wonder Woman has long pants in New Earth. That's her DCnU incarnation. DCnU characters shouldn't share articles with their New Earth counterparts. SeanWheeler 23:36, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

I was reading the Main Talk Page and it said we should have separate articles for the characters. SeanWheeler 19:49, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Naming

Where does the name DCnU come from? Why not just call it the post-Flashpoint universe? DCSarge 07:17, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

It is a fan-created term. One I'm not a fan of. I say Post-Flashpoint or New-52, myself.--HED - HalfElfDragon 04:10, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

I absolutely hate the term 'DCnU'. It sounds like a desperate attempt to seem up to date while actually just sounding ludicrous (those who remember the writing style of the sixties Teen Titans series will understand what I mean). Tony ingram 13:56, October 10, 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems to have stuck.--HED - HalfElfDragon 07:33, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it stands for "Detective Comics new Universe"? SeanWheeler 21:23, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Chronology Direction

Sorry for posting this here: I do see the request that help be requested via the chatroom but my schedule doesn't allow me to be online for that long for the next few days. I have incredibly mixed feelings about the "soft reboot" and how it impacts this database but I will also defer to the wisdom of the site's keepers and follow the direction spelled out above. BUT, I do have questions on how best to proceed with pages regarding time and chronology such as 19th Century. Are we going to make any effort to distinguish the history pre-Flashpoint with that of post-Flashpoint? While I understand the powers-that-be at DC have said that some of DC's history is still intact, those of us dedicated to a more detailed cataloguing of the site know that it isn't true (at least for us). For example, DC could say that the event known as Identity Crisis still happened, but we now know that Wally West didn't play the same role, Firestorm (Ronnie) wasn't killed by the sword of the Golden Age Shining Knight, and the original mind wipe that started the whole thing wasn't caused by the Earth-2/Golden Age Wizard. So while the event may still be in tact, the comics that told the event can't be 100% in tact. And, DC has stated that superheroes (as the world knows them) started 5 years ago, much of the previously published DCU can't be true any longer (All-Star Squadron, JSA, Clark Kent Superboy, Dan Garrett/Ted Kord Blue Beetle, Justice Alliance, Max Mercury, etc.). So even if we don't change the characters, the history pages almost certainly are completely (95% at least) different. So is there any value in starting with a clean slate for history only as provided by New 52 comics and "back populating" previous history only when mentioned in the new series? The only alternative I can see is annotating each and every entry in the current "joint" pages with some reference (i.e. Occurs Pre-COIE, Post-COIE/Pre-Flashpoint, Post-Flashpoint). Thanks for the guidance! Wolford Mnemsis 21:29, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

We're already using something to distinguish between pre- and post-flashpoint.

The DC Universe heavily changed its continuity into the DCnU following the events of Flashpoint in 2011. This was part of an effort to make storylines more accessible to newer readers, beginning with the New 52. This new timeline combines elements from the DCU, Vertigo Universe and Wildstorm Universe while drastically changing the origins and histories of characters.

That indicates that an event or section of a page relates to post-flashpoint history, while everything else is assumed to be pre-. Of course a lot of things have been retconned. All the crises have been retconned. - Hatebunny 21:46, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

So, using 19th Century as an example, we'll list events for 1810, 1820, 1830, etc. THEN the Post-Flashpoint blurb and THEN the revised 1810, 1820, 1830, etc.? - Wolford Mnemsis 02:55, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Are we sure we're going to just put the new universe info on the New Earth articles? Eventually there would be so many retcons that they warrant new character pages. DCnU is just as different from DCAU. Also, the Amalgam Universe started as just New Earth and Earth-616 until they merged (and eventually split up) and we have articles on Amalgam characters. SeanWheeler 19:50, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Also, if we aren't used to the change, we can still keep the New Earth page on top of the Disambig pages and have the DCnU page the first one under the New Earth page, right? And we can still have Kal-El (New Earth) as the name of Kal-El (New Earth), instead of naming Kal-El (DCnU). Seriously, why are we treating the DCnU and New Earth as the same reality? They are different timelines and many origins are different. Can't we put a link to the character's DCnU page in the Post-Flashpoint template? SeanWheeler 21:20, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Problem: It's not a new universe. That's why we're not making new pages. Timeline change does not equal universe change. The characters are the same characters, but time has been altered such that their histories are not the same. We have discussed this at length already, and if we decide to change it eventually, then there will be reasons for that. - Hatebunny 19:57, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

I just read Justice League (Vol 2) #5 last night, and in the back-up section, they had profiles for Diana of Themyscira (DCnU), Arthur Curry (DCnU), and Victor Stone (DCnU), citing Justice League Vol 2 1 as their first appearance. While I disagree with this sentiment, it would appear that DC Comics is considering these characters uniquely different from their New Earth predecessors... Goblyn4evil 21:14, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

We know that DC isn't treating it the same way we are right now. It's pretty clear from our perspective, that DC didn't actually plan this whole thing out very well. Some people half-assedly explained how it was going to work (for example, claims that it was definitely still New Earth, before anything was actually published) - and then nobody bothered to make sure that all the bases were covered. They're treating it like a full reboot because they don't HAVE to take any of the past in consideration. We DO. And, for the time being, this makes more sense. - Hatebunny 21:54, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

If DC Comics is treating it as a new universe, we should too. SeanWheeler 19:47, March 27, 2012 (UTC)

Our goal isn't to cover only what DC is doing this week. Our goal is to give information on everything DC's done and we feel we are best doing that the way we are now. This discussion has been going on for months, not just with you, but with other users as well. The staff here mostly agrees that this is the best approach. If you aren't satisfied, I believe there is a DCnU wikia out there that is only covering the new stuff. I'm sure you'd be welcome there if you don't agree with the policy here. Kyletheobald 22:34, March 27, 2012 (UTC)

I would prefer the old stuff over the new stuff. SeanWheeler 13:10, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

I personally do not consider the DCnU to be the pre-Flashpoint universe in any sense, and speaking as someone who hasn't read a new DC title since the reboot and has no intention of doing so, I'd rather see them separated here. It really irritates me, seeing long established character histories polluted by post-reboot information. It's one of the reasons I rarely come here anymore, having previously been a regular contributor. I just want to pretend the whole mess doesn't exist. Tony ingram 10:55, April 3, 2012 (UTC)

New Earth fans don't want DCnU information in New Earth articles and DCnU fans don't care about New Earth, so they wouldn't read them. It is called "DCnU" as in "Detective Comics new Universe". New Earth and DCnU are completely different. Flash's exploits in FlashPoint created a new universe. There are new origins that have changed, and the characters have new outfits. Could a time paradox cause all this? Speaking of time paradox, Oh no! I'm fading from existance! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Just kidding! SeanWheeler 18:13, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

"DCnU" is a fan term, and you obviously didn't read Flashpoint. - Hatebunny 18:15, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

Even so, doesn't doesn't "New 52" refer to the multiverse? And so what if I never read FlashPoint? I don't spend time at comic book stores. I'm more of a DC Other Media person than a comic book nerd. I only have four comic books at home. I would gladly read FlashPoint if I knew what store in Evanston, Illinois sells comic books. SeanWheeler 19:22, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

"New 52" refers to the 52 new titles that were published (as part of the DCnU) starting in September 2011. It's a reference to the new books, not a new universe. - Hatebunny 19:30, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

I read Flashpoint, but I remain unconvinced that this is the same New Earth, or that DC have any real official policy on the matter. The previous DCU clearly came to an end last year. Tony ingram 19:24, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with you, after reading this article I believe that many (not all) of the writers that refuse to give the DCnU there own separate page are doing so because they can't except that there universe, the one they grew up with has ended and are still holding to the slightest hope of getting it back. The evidence that the comics have showed that this is a new universe with new origin stories, new designs etc. Hell if you read the end of flashpoint, the final scene show the old Flash and Batman having a touching moment about Thomas Wayne's sacrifice showing that the old universe and the DCnU are separate.

Now I understand that it's hard to let go of the past, I've seen this type of resentment on other fandoms such as the Star Trek fandom after the the new film came out and many could not except that the characters and stories that they grew up with had ended or more recently with the Legend of Zelda fandom when the official timeline was announced, if you went on any of the Legend of Zelda wikis at that time you saw bitterness and refusal to change the wiki pages because they could not except that ideas that they grew up with where changed. However, both these fandoms excepted and now Memory Alpha has pages for both the old and new characters, (here is Kirk for an example: [1]link title [2]) and the LOZ wikis have changed there pages to fit the new timeline.

Some of the things I've seen on this discussion seem to be clinching at straws and with the logic I've seen being used, the Pre-Crises characters should be on the same page, hell there's probably a bigger argument for that as old characters such as Super-boy Prime and Bat-Mite still existed, several characters still had memory old the old universe and that the numbering on many comics such as Action Comics didn't change the issue numbering.I thinks it is time for us to let go of the past and let the DCnU be its own thing while the old one can be cherished by those who love it. 08:42, May 6, 2012 (UTC)Gretnablue

I agree. Whatever DC's original intentions, this is clearly a whole new universe. Tony ingram 09:04, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Still haven't read Flashpoint, but based on the arguments above I am more and more inclined to go for separate pages. I think the initial refusal to split up was more "let's wait a while" and "why should every background character get a new page now?" than "boohoo they changed it now it sucks" (well, I think it does, but it's not an argument). I however, don't like to call them (DCnU). It's just an ugly acronym. --Tupka²¹⁷ 09:27, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

I am currently very groggy from muscle relaxants, but you shall all hear my words as though they are drooling out of the mouth of god. The reason we have not made new pages is certainly because it's a major hassle, but our logic does make sense. DC has changed continuity on a grand scale at least three times prior to Flashpoint. The major way in Crisis on Infinite Earths actually showed you that they were erasing all the other earths and then squishing them all into one. That was how you knew it was a "New Earth". The next time they messed with continuity was Zero Hour. What happened there? They changed the timeline. What did that mean for New Earth? Nothing. It was still New Earth - its timeline had just changed. Then it happened again with Infinite Crisis. All of the Many earths squished back into one (and yet somehow not squished back into one... DIDIO!!!). Why didn't we make a new universe then? 'Cause it was obviously the same universe, with only minor alterations.

Flashpoint came along and on the last page, we get this scene where Pandora takes the separate universes of Wildstorm, Dakotaverse, Vertigo, and DC and then squishes them all together by making just one timeline - the "right" timeline. This means that while we see all of these other characters in the DCnU, it isn't a change of universe that brought them there, it's a change of timeline - just as the alternate present shown in Flashpoint is a timeline, and not a universe. I will now demonstrate all of this via badly drawn diagram:

So, as you can see (maybe), with the crisis, all of the earth's get mushed into New Earth. Then you have Zero Hour and Infinite Crisis - which essentially do nothing to New Earth. Then, at some point, and for no reason, the Dakotaverse was incorporated into New Earth (and we didn't make new pages). Then Flashpoint happens, and the Wildstorm Universe and Vertigo Universe come together with the current one. Now, by a strange twist of publishing rigmarole, Vertigo now continues as its own universe, on account of there now being two separate John Constantines being published at the same time. We did create a new page for him.

Now, the reason why people are up in arms about this is valid to a point. The reason that this whole thing is totally fucked up and doesn't work is because DC 'did not think this through at all. It was a marketing gimmick, and it was a ploy to give the writers a bit more freedom (though it doesn't sound like they're getting any more than usual). As you could see from Flashpoint, timeline changes can be very, very drastic to the point that the reality you have come to know is unrecognizable. This is the case here.

We have used an in-universe explanation as to why this is still New Earth. Why it especially doesn't seem to make sense to our opposition, as readers, is because they have actually moved us back in time as readers, and thereby condensed something like ten years of continuity into 5 years - or even 20 years into 3 years. People with analytic minds will see, with relatively little inspection, that most of Batman's pre-flashpoint continuity is still in tact - which makes no freakin' sense, given that he's only supposed to have been active for 5 years. Again, this is not our fault. This is DC's fault. Bad planning.

Having said all of that, I am not convinced that we shouldn't make new pages. I am merely explaining why we haven't - which is logically sound in comparison to the planning that went into making the DCnU happen. Their in-universe explanation is/was insufficient. And they - the editorial staff - don't give a crap about our obsessive need to catalogue their characters and histories in a specific way. All they wanted was to mix things up.

That said, the colossal fuck-up that is that lack of planning may be exactly why we need new pages. I am not, however, going to be in favour of their implementation until one of two things happens:

There must be an in-universe demonstration (possibly through this Trinity War event) that the DCnU is not a permanent thing. I see it coming on the horizon like a foot out of a mouth. OR DC must fuck its new continuity up to the point where not even the external logic which we applied to the events shown to us can save it from being something other than what they told us it was.

If necessary, you may substitute all of the above with "Dan DiDio, and much of his editorial staff, do not think about how to make the marketing gimmick they want to employ make sense in-universe. They care much more about what that gimmick is, and how it will make them competitive with their competitors."

That is all. Tough it. - Hatebunny 13:52, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

That's a nice argument you have there. Only one problem: It's self-contradicting. You say merging all the pre-Crisis universes into the one post-Crisis universe at the end of COIE counts as a reboot and a new, separate, distinct universe. Uh-hu. I'm with you so far. But when Dakotaverse and Wildstorm merge at the end of Flashpoint and all the major characters get new costumes and new backstories and new everything... oh well then you say obviously it's not a new universe. Because... DC said so?! So, merging universes creates a new universe, except when it doesn't. Well, that just makes so much sense. Way to stay consistent... NOT! The argument that the new DCnU timeline still contains elements of the previous timeline and thus it's just a new timeline and not a new universe doesn't hold water either because the same dam thing happened at the end of COIE, and we don't call the post-Crisis universe a "New timeline" now do we? Don't make me come over there and beat you over the head with all the historical continuity that either got folded into the post-Crisis universe or declared out-of-cannon. I have a stack of comic books and I'm not afraid to use them! How about we be consistent and call the DCnU what it is: A reboot. A new, separate, distinct universe. How would that be?

By the way, if you read the last page of Booster Gold Vol 2 # 47, you'll see that Booster ends up at Vanishing Point with his costume all torn up and not remembering his adventures in the Flashpoint universe. (no mention is made of if he remembers the post-Crisis or New Earth universe(s) or not). More importantly, he's still wearing his Legion Flight Ring on that page... something he doesn't have (and apparently never had) in the post-Flashpoint universe. Explanation? Vanishing Point exists outside of time, right? Well, if the changes that came about when Barry Allen altered time didn't affect Vanish Point, then perhaps it (and Booster Gold (post-Crisis)) may still exist, much like the Earth-2 Superman did after the COIE,a DC is keeping it in it's back pocket in case they want to retcon the hell out of something later. Just a theory.--DCSarge (talk) 21:27, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

That wasn't my argument. I said, CoIE is a new universe because it merged the multiverse into a single amalgam universe. The DCnU should be the same universe, because it is a time-line change. Basically, the "New Earth" universe was over-written starting from the beginning of time. Ultimately, that means everything has the potential to be different as a result - but it is still the same universe.

That's how it should be, anyway. But DC's editorial staff is not as diligent about this stuff as we are. They wanted a fresh start, and they thought they could do that with Flashpoint. So, despite the fact that it makes absolutely no sense, it IS a new universe - because DC says so. (They said it wasn't at first. We took them at their word. They changed their minds). We're working right now on making the changes that will need to be made in order to move all of the work we've done to a new Universe.

Mark my words, though. We're not admitting we were wrong. We're admitting that DC didn't know what it was doing. Our logic holds, theirs doesn't. - Hatebunny (talk) 21:36, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

Earth 2

What should we do for the new Earth 2 comic and characters? It looks to be wildly different from the pre-Crisis Earth Two and the more recent "Earth-2". Batgorilla 01:23, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think putting a Flashpoint header into the character pages of the existing Earth-2 characters makes sense; they'd only previously appeared in about three issues after all, so they weren't really significant in the way that the Earth Two/New Earth characters were. And it does seem more logical than assuming that the now seemingly non existent New earth JSA were for some reason transplanted to another Earth and warped beyond recognition. I'd say take it that the current Earth-2 is a Flashpoint warped version of the Earth-2 of the Justice Society Infinity. Otherwise, we wind up having to call it NuEarth-2 or something...Tony ingram 09:10, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

But is it still Earth-2? The comic is called "Earth Two". Sans the hyphen. Action Comics (Volume 2) #9 talks about "Earth 23". No hyphen. So, "Earth-Letters" = pre-Crisis, "Earth-Number" = post-52, and "Earth Number" = post-Flashpoint? Probably too early to tell. --Tupka²¹⁷ 09:23, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. But in the meantime, the information has to go somewhere. I've just made an experimental change to Jason Garrick (Earth-2). See what you think but change it back if you disagree. I must admit, I've really too little enthusiasm for any of the current books to really care as long as the New Earth JSA members pages aren't screwed up. Tony ingram 09:35, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, for now, let's just store it on Earth-2. --Tupka²¹⁷ 09:45, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

This convention is older than I am and it's completely made up for the site. DC has never been consistent about naming their Multiverses differently, we just decided to use Earth-Two for Pre-Crisis and Earth-2 for Post-Infinite Crisis because it's an easier shorthand.

- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 16:00, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

I have a suggestion, but temporarily why not just refer to it as New Earth-2? The original Earth-1 and Earth-2 were destroyed and replaced with New Earth, so couldn't Earth-2 be replaced with New Earth-2? Just a thought. --S11mkrieger 17:55, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Nope, the original Earth-Two was destroyed. Earth-2 existed from 52 to either Flashpoint or today, dependent on your opinion on it. Currently, it's at "Earth-2", it's (apparently) the same multiverse, just retconned. Only time will tell if that missing hyphen means anything. --Tupka²¹⁷ 18:04, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Aw Yeah Comics

So I went to a comic book store in Skokie called Aw Yeah Comics, the two people who were there were Art Baltazar, the illustrator of Superman and his friend Jon. Jon knows alot about comics. I asked them a lot of questions such as the whole Captain Marvel thing. I also asked Jon if he considers the New 52 to be the same universe as New Earth, and he said no. When Flash altered the timeline, he actually created a new universe. The only thing from New Earth that survived was Barry Allen, The Flash (although Flash didn't remember FlashPoint). All the other characters are just New 52 counterparts to the New Earth characters. And since Art was there and he didn't argue, and Art is a DC employee and Jon is a friend of Art and a comics fan, I could consider their words as fact. SeanWheeler (talk) 00:37, December 7, 2012 (UTC)

This debate is pretty much over, slo-dawg. - Hatebunny (talk) 00:41, December 7, 2012 (UTC)

Ok there are several points to be made here. 1: We've been in the planning stages on changing things for a while now. At the onset of the new books, DC said it was the same universe (probably not to scare away existing fans). We took DC at face value at the time. 2: Art Baltazar is a DC artist/writer and an awesome dude but as far as I remember, the vast majority of his work is not set in the main universe. Doesn't mean that he isn't in the know but he probably isn't the go-to guy for information about it either. 3: Taking the word of a friend of a guy who considers it a new universe, isn't an exactly super-reliable source of information either. What he "considers" really isn't relevant. Kyletheobald (talk) 01:06, December 7, 2012 (UTC)