Talk:List of teams and organizations in DC Comics

I removed a couple of entries that were incorrect. DC does NOT own the Fighin' 5. They didn't buy them from Charlton, someone else did. Also, DC does NOT own the THUNDER Agents. They are publishing the Archives, but don't own them.

emb021

Edited most of the entries to fix bad links or remove links from entries that wont bne linked to for the forseeable future. The still linked reds are for pages that I myself or others would have a vested interest in creating. Multiple entries were trimmed down to singles, obscures were completely removed. --Basique 17:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

DC Comics Encyclopedia

I've begun to add entries from the DC Comics Encyclopedia (published in 2004) that essentially updates DC's Who's Who. For each I provide either a link to an article that mentions the organization or a brief description backed by its First Appearance date. Note I use the designations given in the tome, i.e. the Ultramarines are now listed by the correct full name of International Ultramarine Corps. Wilfredo Martinez 03:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

On References

Company owned labels should be italicized because they are possibly creator-owned or not directly affiliated with the DC Universe. Television shows should not because they can reference a team, place or character eg superfriends, jlu, dcau etc. Personally, I think any title of a book or television show without a volume# can be misleading. Another example is how references are used. Eg Batman tv series may depict the batman character in the tv series so should be characterized as such with a 'see also' or something. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.42.105 (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

On the batman television show ref., its not part of warner brothers television so it should be labeled (eg wonder woman tv series) such as warner brothers because the company absorbed the rights to DC Comics. So its either DC Comics creator owned or Warner Brothers Television. Same goes with superfriends, hanna-barbara was absorbed into warner brothers animation because they bought the rights. If any of these fictional characters were to reappear on television it would be under the warner brothers guise. So why are the company's italicized? Well they are original publishers except may not be directly affiliated with the dc universe. So until the new table is up I would Basically just put it under a first appearance reference and not a original publisher one.

The major problem of course is, you cannot cite a tv show without a volume number...if there is one. You can cite the tv show, but what if the character appears in say the 2nd season of episode 5. Sooo, if its not a label, or company owned creation and its not a volume number from a comic book, then its a generic link or reference anyways. These references should be non-italicized because its sooo vague anyhow.

Personally I would only list characters who have appeared in the comics, or similar named ones. I would just remove the television or non-comic appearances and put them in there corresponding sections or lists. The problem with that idea is the tv characters should not be listed under certain circumstances. Eg Harley Quinn, or Lock-Up would be listed and Superman x not or there would be no Rothul listed. Tv Creator owned Clones, or rip-offs could not be listed but could vice versa. That would be unfair I think. For instance, Rothul is Lex Luthor. I would maybe keep it simple and list popular characters only in more than one appearance, for instance Sweet Tooth appeared more than twice and so did Livewire, if not of course published by or directly affiliated with DC Comics.

So if you're getting paid by warner brothers they have the rights to the character as well because they own DC Comics. These are company or label owned references, and along with comic book references and first appearances.. should be italicized.

--69.255.42.105 (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)