Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (comics)

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.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Move 2 Formative Discussion 3 Somewhat related: Naming conventions 4 Expanded 5 Character vs Title 6 Roman Numerals 7 Character page names 8 Navboxes 9 Topics for naming conventions

[edit] Move

Ironic that the stated convention is (comics) while the page on the naming convention itself is located at (comic books). Should this be moved to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics)? -Sean Curtin 02:56, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

• I agree. Steve block talk 10:33, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Good point. leigh (φθόγγος) 21:14, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral. Let me point out that the reason I originally created at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comic books) was because I didn't want to imply that the convention should apply to comics (comic strips, manga, etc.) in general; the reason the disambiguation phrase was "(comics)" instead of "(comic books)" is that the former is shorter, easier to remember, and easier to type in. —Lowellian (reply) 11:39, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

• Hmmm. I can see why not to apply it to manga, but how would we differentiate strips? And why? In the wake of Understanding Comics I'd think it would be reasonable to expand this convention to strips. I'd also argue superceding the (cartoonist) tag with regards to those working in strips, since we can't really agree what a cartoonist is, beyond single panel cartoons, which consensus agrees are drawn by a cartoonist. Steve block talk 12:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not making any claim as to whether they should or should not apply to other things; at the time, I just wanted to be careful to not force conventions onto things (such as non-"comic book" comics) which I hadn't yet thought over in detail. —Lowellian (reply) 20:14, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Move. And listed on WP:RM - SoM 19:05, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Move. – AxSkov (☏) 08:30, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. Dragons flight 22:47, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Formative Discussion

The discussion below is from Talk:List of Marvel Comics characters and is how the current convention formed. Steve block talk 15:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

List of possible disambiguation phrases:

• Storm (comics)
• Storm (Marvel character)
• Storm (Marvel Comics)
• Storm (Marvel Comics character)
• Storm (superhero)

The "(superhero)" or "(supervillain)" disambiguation phrase has several problems:

• It is often not quite clear whether a character is a hero or a villain. Though usually considered a hero, the Punisher could be considered a villain (Bloodaxe follows the same methods, and is usually considered a villain). Similar cases of ambiguity of moral affiliation could be made for Deadpool, Elektra, Thanos, and many other characters. There are also characters without any moral affiliation at all (example: Living Tribunal).
• It seems to limit characters to just the superhero genre, which is not the only genre of characters. Should we consider certain characters who have no special powers (e.g. supporting characters like Uncle Ben) to be heroes? What about characters with no superpowers, but just military training, like Nick Fury?
• Another problem with the "(superhero)" or "(supervillain)" designation is that it is not necessarily gender-neutral. For example, for Storm, should she be Storm (superhero) or Storm (superheroine)? And for Lilith, should she be Lilith (supervillain) or Lilith (supervillainess)?
• In an effort to standardize the disambiguation name, some Wikipedia users were using the phrase "(superhero)" even for characters that were clearly supervillains. This made the entries confusing.

The advantage of a disambiguation phrase including the word "Marvel" is that it makes it clear what character is being referred to in those cases where multiple comic book characters from different publishers share the same codename (example: Captain Marvel is used by both Marvel Comics and DC Comics). However, any disambiguation phrase including the word "Marvel" also has several problems:

• Just using "(Marvel)" by itself as a disambiguation phrase is not acceptable, as it is too vague and could mean too many things. Thus, it is necessary that it be used in combination with others words, like "(Marvel Comics)", "(Marvel character)", etc. This makes the disambiguation phrase long and hard-to-remember.
• Many non-comics fans won't know what Marvel is.
• Marvel is currently popular in the mainstream; will it continue to be so years in the future?
• What if Marvel Comics were bought by another company, as Wildstorm was bought by DC Comics?

The disambiguation phrase "(comics)" does not have the drawbacks mentioned above, and furthermore has several advantages:

• It immediately makes the genre clear.
• It is only a single word, and very simple, in comparison to a complicated, difficult-to-remember disambiguation phrase like "(Marvel Comics character)".
• This is a disambiguation phrase that could be applied to teams like Generation X (comics) and alien races like Asgardians (comics) as well.

[edit] Somewhat related: Naming conventions

(This section thought relevant and so archived here from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics.) Steve block talk 19:17, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

This is going to keep being a problem for us, but we can cut down on the problem significantly by making our article naming policy very obvious. I copy/pasted a version of it from the Talk archives and merged it with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comic books), and if everyone likes that policy I suggest we put it someplace where people will see it, and try to enforce it. A couple articles that need renaming/moving, if that policy holds:

• Orbiter Graphic Novel to Orbiter (comics)
• Blue Monday (comic) to Blue Monday (comics)
• The Sandman (DC Comics Golden Age) to Sandman (DC Comics Golden Age); both Simon/Kirby's and Gaiman's series were called The Sandman but the Gardner Fox Wesley Dodds Sandman never appeared in a series by that name; therefore the article should not contain a "The".
• Plus whatever issues raised by Hueysheridan above.

-leigh (φθόγγος) 04:09, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

I have a few problems with this and with the vagueness of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comic books) in one important respect. The whole (comics) or (comic) thing isn't very clear. I would have thought that when the article is about a specific series, like say Blue Monday cited above, the (comic) tag would be more appropriate, but when the subject is more general like a character or an industry convention or somesuch then (comics) would be better. I understand the desire for simplicity but the issue comes up in examples like the Superman (comic) suggestion I have above - Superman (comics) seems too broad a name for what I had in mind. Hueysheridan 14:43, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

(comic) should be a more specific disambig tag, the way you only use (DC Comics) if (comics) is already taken. Superman (comics). - SoM 15:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I think I see what you mean, but I dont agree. I can see a point when big articles like the Superman entry get too cumbersome and most the detailled listing of the characters various comic book series needs to be shifted into their own article which should then be called Superman (comics). In fact I already see a case for doing that, especially in the Spider-Man article. As the proposed Superman (comic) (and Batman (comic), X-Men (comic) etc.) would concern a single title wouldnt (comic) be more appropriate?

Being guilty of a couple of these names, the Blue Monday one and there's a few graphic novel ones out there, I'd be up for maintaining a clear policy on this. One major problem is that some people are going to argue that the naming convention for comic books doesn't apply to graphic novels, and so is something we should thrash out. If we perhaps confer with the webcomics project and come up with some sort of naming conventions for comics, that would be an idea, and we could then put up an rfc and mention it at the village pump. Steve block talk 21:14, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Expanded

I added a few examples to clarify the position held at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics. Steve block talk 10:03, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Character vs Title

I feel like this has been discussed already, but I cannot seem to find it. What is the naming convention for differentiating between a character or team, and the title they appear in? The X-men article seems to combine both into one article - the team and the title both. But for titles like Negation, which is not solely about the Negation itself, what should we do? Any ideas? Thanks. LordAmeth 21:59, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Current practice is to detail the publication history of the character in the entry, and have the entry address the character rather than the series. If the series needs it's own seperate entry, which I would only suggest if the character page was overly long, and I don't think Negation (comics) is, I would suggest using (comics series). Steve block talk 22:22, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Numerals

I think we need to come to a consensus on the usage of Roman numerals for mantles which have been held by more than one character. If we use them, it would be easier to distinguish between heroes and title Superhero Boxes, but there arises the problem of certain characters like Firestorm. Is he a different character every time he merges with someone else? The usual convention is that Firestorm I is Ronnie Raymond and Martin Stein, that II is Ronnie alone, and that Jason Rusch is III. Jason has "permanently" merged with Martin Stein, though, so does that make him Firestorm IV? And he's now "permanently" merged with Firehawk, so are they Firestorm V?

What happens when we get into the Robins? Conventionally, Dick Grayson is Robin I, Jason Todd is Robin II, and Tim Drake is Robin III. Is Stephanie Brown Robin IV? Does she count at all? Where does Carrie Kelly fall into the numeral system, if at all?

What do we do about characters like Nightwing? Superman was the first Nightwing, but that's not even in continuity any more. It seems wrong to say Dick Grayson is Nightwing II, because he didn't inherit the title from anyone. Similarly, is Kimiyo Hoshi Dr. Light II? Not only did she not "inherit" the mantle from Arthur Light, but she's on the other side of the moral spectrum. Again, we also run into the problem that there was a "Dr. Light" who appeared only three times in the Golden Age before never being used again. Does he deserve to be Dr. Light I, pushing Arthur Light to II and Kimiyo Hoshi to III?

When you get into the Green Lanterns, it gets even worse. They don't really take over for each other, plus there are around 7200 right now. Are only the human ones on Earth the ones who get numerals?

Are we better off without Roman numerals altogether? Previous discussion of the topic in Wikiproject Comics seemed to come to the decision that Roman numerals should be avoided. If so, however, what system do we use? --Rocketgoat 01:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Here's my take on what we should have on titling in infoboxes: when it concerns heroes/villains with direct lineage, where the same basic identity is getting assumed by a different person (Robin, Batgirl, Blue Beetle), we need to differentiate on disambig pages. Individual pages, it doesn't matter. There are certain characters (Rose and Thorn) where more than one person has held a name, but aren't really related in anyway. Cybertooth85 02:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

When referring to the character, refer to the character by their name, not using a roman numeral. Then we sidestep the issue and maintain accuracy. I don't really see how this is an issue with all the info boxes, simply use Robin (publication) to show you mean the publication rather than the character. Steve block talk 08:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

That's a a fair point, but how do we explain the relation of a character with the same name as another character, especially when they're related in costume and role (Robin, Batgirl, BB)? People need to understand how chronoglically, Cassandra Cain came after Barbara Gordon. Cybertooth85 19:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Explain it where? In infoboxes? In what infobox would this be an issue? Steve block talk 19:21, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

If we have the characters' civilian names in their superheroboxes, we need to be consistent with it. Alan Scott and Hal Jordan both have Green Lantern as their title, as do both Jaime Reyes and Ted Kord for Blue Beetle (the same thing for the three Flashes). If we're going to show that more than one hero has had the same name (in the boxes) we need to explain differences in versions: Green Lantern (I) for Alan Scott, Green Lantern (II) for Hal Jordan, etc. based on when characters premiered in this identity. If we aren't going to do that, we need to put the civilian names in the titles of their superboxes, instead of just the mantle they wear. Cybertooth85 05:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Can the title be made a wiki-link? I can't see it being a huge issue since the article should discuss the issue. I don't really see how this is an issue, and I can't see how a reader is really going to be confused in any way at all. Steve block talk 19:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I've read comics for a long time and even I am confused as to why Firestorm I and II both Ronnie Raymond. Listing characters with Roman numerals also implies a chronological succession, but Hal Jordan didn't necessarily oust Alan Scott. Neither did Guy Gardner to Hal or John Stewart to Guy. --Rocketgoat 21:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Plus, Abin Sur would technically be GL II based on chronological debuts. And if we're going by "in-continuity", hoooboy... Jordan's around GL MMMMMMMCXI or something. Plus you've got obscure one-offs and retcons messing up even "straight" orders - do Will Payton and Prince Gavyn count as the same Starman for numbering systems or what? We've got the uber-obscure Angel's evil uncle Dazzler who appeared in three backups - in otherwise reprint-only comics to boot! - who debuted before Alison Blaire. And what about when both Marvel & DC have used a character name - is Mar-Vell Captain Marvel IV because of Billy, Mary and Freddy?

Too many worms in the can - no Roman numerals at all, and disambiguate by real names/alternate codenames/etc. - SoM 22:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Character page names

This is something that I think is a real issue. All over Wikipedia we have pages like Alan Scott, Tim Drake, John Henry Irons, and so on. That is, character pages named after the secret identity of a character rather than their better-known heroic identity. This occurs largely because characters share superhero identities (ie. The Flash and Robin). The thing is, certainly comics fans can navigate through the entries based on this naming practice, but I feel it's detrimental for everyone else who doesn't know so much about comics. In a way it's an insular naming practice (The modern Superboy article used to be named Kon-El, a name even most comics readers aren't familiar with regarding the character). The Starman articles are named with the character name first followed by modifierrs in parenthesis (Golden Age, Silver Age, etc.). I think this should be the general course of action. WesleyDodds 07:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the spirit of the naming conventions is keep it simple, so if no disambiguation is needed, don't use it. The lead of an article should clarify what the article is about and clear up any confusion. Steve block Talk 13:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

This is also being discussed here. CovenantD 15:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It would appear to have been archived : ) - Jc37 13:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Navboxes

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates/navboxes. We're discussing the need, use, and style of navbox templates with the goal of creating a WP:CMC guideline. --Chris Griswold 05:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Topics for naming conventions

There are several issues which I think desperately need to be discussed/clarified. I started writing it here, but I decided to make it it's own sub-page, for discussion:

• Topics for naming conventions/(talk)

- Jc37 13:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

As per the discussion, updating the conventions. - jc37 00:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Um, maybe next time the discussions could take place other than your user space (like this page)? CovenantD 03:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I sincerely wanted discussion, as I think was/is obvious from the discussion extant. Please note the date of when I posted that : ) I cross posted it in several places. and even "moved it down" at least once on a talk page. - jc37 05:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

(It's now moved to a sub-page of this.) - jc37 17:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)