Renaming the DC Rebirth comic pages

Brought over from Ask the Tropers.

So DC Rebirth is a line of comics, many of which have their own pages, such as Batman (Rebirth), Detective Comics (Rebirth), Supergirl (Rebirth), etc. The series are actually just called Batman, Detective Comics and Supergirl, but the Rebirth identifies it as that specific series, since there have been a few series called Batman and Supergirl. Usually (here and on comic sites), the year the series began is used to tell them apart, e.g. Batgirl (2000), Batgirl (2011), Supergirl (2011), but whatever, right?

But the problem is there actually are one-off comics called Batman: Rebirth and Supergirl: Rebirth — they actually started those series I mentioned (Batman: Rebirth #1 was basically the prologue for the Rebirth run of Batman, for example). So it's not clear when Batman: Rebirth #1 refers to the one-shot or issue 1 of Batman (Rebirth) with the current naming scheme. And since the Rebirth pages began, there have been numerous cases of people referring to Batman: Rebirth #4 and the like, which don't exist (hell, even keeping this naming scheme, it'd be Batman (Rebirth) #4). I even saw an entry about "Superwoman: Rebirth #1", when Superwoman didn't even get a Rebirth one-shot and is the first series to ever be called Superwoman. I can only assume the naming scheme between the various works is to blame. The only series seemingly exempt from these mistakes are Action Comics and Detective Comics which kept the numbering of their original series, since they're Long Runner|s.

Further, I want to create a page for The Flash's Rebirth series (started in 2016)... but there's already a series that's actually called The Flash: Rebirth (from 2009) that I also want to make a page for. So it'd have to be called The Flash (Rebirth) (2016) or something, unless there's a way to make The Flash: Rebirth and The Flash (Rebirth) two separate pages without it leading to more confusion. I guess you could separate them via folders on the same page, but that's a bit of a wonky solution and doesn't allow for very good Cross Wicking. Plus, unlike Old Man Logan, which is split into folders, the The Flash: Rebirth and The Flash (2016) are not that similar.

The only justification I've seen for calling the series Supergirl (Rebirth) and the like is that they're unofficial nicknames. As someone who frequents a few comic sites, I have NEVER seen them used (I just searched Googled "Supergirl: Rebirth #2" with quotation marks and only got two pages of results). People generally just say Supergirl #4 and the context makes it clear that they're talking about the current series (the Rebirth one). As someone who created one of those pages (Justice League of America (Rebirth)), I was just following the lead of the other pages. Just quickly checking the first wave of series on DC Rebirth, it seems troper duranaparthur started the trend and everyone just followed suit.

So basically I'd just like to get some thoughts on changing the different Rebirth Comic Book pages to Batman 2016, Detective Comics 2016, Supergirl 2016, etc.? It'd be more accurate, be in line with the naming scheme of previous series, be less confusing, and allow for some pages to exist without being confusing or inconsistent with the naming scheme of other pages. There'd really be no negatives, aside from having to rewrite some examples to remove the "Superwoman: Rebirth #3" and the like. But it'd definitely be better in the long-term.

The series that I propose to change, and what I propose to change them into, are as follows:

Batgirl (Rebirth) -> Batgirl 2016

Batman (Rebirth) -> Batman (2016)

Batwoman (Rebirth) -> Batwoman 2017

Deathstroke (Rebirth) -> Deathstroke 2016

Detective Comics (Rebirth) -> Detective Comics 2016

Green Arrow (Rebirth) -> Green Arrow 2016

Justice League of America (Rebirth) -> Justice League Of America 2017

Nightwing (Rebirth) -> Nightwing 2016

Supergirl (Rebirth) -> Supergirl 2016

Superman (Rebirth) -> Superman 2016

Teen Titans (Rebirth) -> Teen Titans 2016

Titans (Rebirth) -> Titans 2016

Wonder Woman (Rebirth) -> Wonder Woman 2016

edited 7th Jul '17 8:27:48 AM by FuzzyBarbarian

How can someone help if they are not familiar with these comics?

You said that "Superwoman: Rebirth" doesn't exist, so obviously, any such reference would need to be changed to just "Superwoman." Great, you don't need to be familiar with the work to fix that. But what about the other 13 comic series you've listed in OP?

I take it that anything that references "Batman: Rebirth #4" or with a higher number would be easy enough to spot. What about the other comics?

I think the more simple the tell, the better. But that may just be my opinion.

It sounds like the DC Rebirth line is just that, a separate line altogether. So title those as "<superhero>(DC Rebirth)" and the others as "<superhero>:Rebirth". Using the year won't help if the DC Rebirth series runs longer than a year, or if the ":Rebirth" name is used in any year that the DC Rebirth series exists.

edited 7th Jul '17 10:17:37 AM by Madrugada

@Madrugada

It's not really a separate line, just a banner under which DC is publishing ALL their comics in their relaunch (like what Marvel does with its annual relaunches (Marvel NOW!, All-New, All-Different Marvel, Marvel NOW! (2016), Marvel Legacy off the top of my head)). The only titles not involved are those involved in other lines (Vertigo, Young Animal and soon Dark Matter) and some random miniseries every now and then.

Using the year does help because it just denotes when the series started. It's never meant to indicate that a series ran only for that year. It's not only how online comic shops and Comixology (the main digital comics distributor) do it (some will also put when the series ends, e.g. Batman (2011-2016), but in the solicitations by the publishers themselves. It's even done on this very wiki, with examples like Batgirl (2011) (which ran for five years), Ms. Marvel (2014) (which has its first series beginning in 2014, but now just places them all on that page since they're by the same writer starring the same character) and even non-comic examples like Daredevil (2015), which ran for two seasons and is getting a third.

Plus, I don't think "<series name> (DC Rebirth)" would solve the issue of people getting the name wrong. Because, well, the comics themselves have a giant "DC Universe Rebirth" banner plastered over the top and people already shorten DC Rebirth to Rebirth. That actually is incredibly common, and I've yet to see anyone call it "DC Rebirth" (when not directly linking to the main page on this and this site alone) since the relaunch started. Plus, there's still the matter of consistency with the other comic pages, which, so far, follow the "<series title> (<year the series began>)" format if there's already a Comic Book/<name of series> page, or "<creator's full name>'s <series title> if a creator's run on a series or franchise spanned multiple comics series (e.g. Jonathan Hickman's Avengers).

@Water Blap

Oooo... yeah, that is a problem. Just for reference, if the series has a Rebirth issue, there's only one. So it'd only be an issue if an example refers to, say, Supergirl: Rebirth #1 and you're not sure if it means the actual Supergirl: Rebirth #1 or issue 1 of Supergirl (2016). I'd say that, if you're not sure if the example in question didn't happen in <series name>: Rebirth #1, leave it for someone more familiar. I read quite a few of the Rebirth one-shots (of those I listed, the only one I haven't read is Supergirl: Rebirth #1) and could spot some of them out, and if enough people see this, it shouldn't be that hard.

edited 8th Jul '17 2:09:21 AM by FuzzyBarbarian

Here's the thing: Batman: Rebirth is not a comic line. It's actually Batman Volume 3. Rebirth is a storyline.

@ Another Guy

Thanks for coming.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Batman: Rebirth isn't a comic line".

Though when it comes to storylines, some works are split into the arcs, even if they're by the same writer. E.g. Batman: Zero Year, Batman: Endgame, The Judas Contract. Though I guess the first two stories had tie-in issues, so it's iffy.

But you're correct, it is indeed actually the third Batman series. And since many sites (including this one) use the year system instead of volume, it makes sense to change it to Batman (2016).

edited 8th Jul '17 9:53:00 PM by FuzzyBarbarian

I can understand the confusion, but I feel like having Rebirth in the title is very important.

Even with the re-expansion of the timeline, due to Superman Reborn, now making the New 52 timeline go from about 7 years to closer to 15-17 again, the Rebirth timeline and details are still radically different than they were pre-Flashpoint.

While adding "2017" or such to the year (such as Batgirl (2009) and Batgirl (2011)) might initially seem to be a solution, it would actually be counter intuitive. If, for example, that Teen Titans is cancelled and then relaunched into a new volume (such as what happened during the New 52), then it would not make sense to make a Teen Titans 2017 and a Teen Titans 2019 page, but rather still have them under the Rebirth banner.

As for the conflict with the Flash Rebirth miniseries and the Rebirth relaunch, it would probably be better to add the date to the miniseries: The Flash Rebirth (2009)

@ Biznizz

The contents and the story aren't important in this though. It's just a formatting issue that leads to numerous other errors. Unless there's also a more effective way of making sure people sotp doing the mistake, this is an easy way to go about it.

Plus, when it comes to Rebirth, the articles already state that they're part of the Rebirth relaunch. It's just not that big a deal. The various examples for stories like Batman: Endgame and the like don't denote that it's a New 52 series. And when it comes to examples on the main pages of tropes, the context for it should be given anyway, like just for pre and post-Crisis and pre and post-Flashpoint, if it is a situation where there was indeed a change.

And when it comes to cancelled and relaunched series and the like, why wouldn't you give them their own pages? The pages are meant to detail different works, not that franchise/team in that specific era. And even if you didn't want to do that, Ms. Marvel 2014 just splits them into folders. Heck, you just raised another issue: if one does indeed get cancelled, examples on other pages and the like will have to have Teen Titans (Rebirth) (vol. 2) #4 and the like, which is really getting into misnaming the source.

Also, if DC remove the "Rebirth" banner, which they probably eventually will, it runs into yet another problem that could be sidestepped with the year system — if Batgirl (2011) were called Batgirl (New 52) (and it's a series that is very continuity-altering that would require the New 52 distinction if it that were important), that'd have been an issue once the branding were removed.

edited 9th Jul '17 5:07:30 AM by FuzzyBarbarian

I don't really see a reason to make these moves at the current time. If an issue comes up in the future, we'll deal with it then. Now, since I have to talk about this somewhere... RANT INCOMING!

The disambiguation for comics gives weird results at some times as well. Currently, tropers have tendencies to screw things up:

Examples from completely different runs are being potholed to the one we have a page for because it starred the same character, e.g. Batgirl (2000) getting links referring to the '08 miniseries. This is usually for lack of a better option, as we keep reorganizing Characters.Batman every two months so we can't consistently link to a page describing Cassandra. Nevertheless, these are work pages, not character pages.

Outright sinkholes at times, such as potholing every single mention of Tim Drake or Stephanie Brown to their respective series.

Unresolved collisions, such as (most obnoxiously in recent months) Titans Hunt, which both occasionally get potholes relating to the wrong story arc. Most of the Titans Hunt '15 links have been cleaned up, but there are still other cases like this.

Regarding The Flash: Rebirth's collision: By our naming policy, should we end up with pages for both, the miniseries would be either FlashRebirth or TheFlashRebirth (depending on whether we go by the indicia or the covers) and the ongoing would be TheFlash2016. The 2016 Rebirth #1 oneshot would also be on the latter's page.

That's not even mentioning the debacle that can ensue when there's a collision of noms de cape. Especially the cross-company Captain Marvel collision. (We can't have a page called Captain Marvel since we need it for a disambig. So we put Billy and Mar-Vell on their own pages. Now there's a new Captain Marvel, but we already have a page for her - Ms. Marvel - so examples for the new volumes (of which there have now been three or so) just get shoved on to that page. But then there's a new Ms. Marvel... and so on and so forth.

Well there IS an issue now. The misnaming of works if incredibly prevalent on the main DC Rebirth page, and it doesn't seem to be getting better. There's references to "Superwoman: Rebirth #2" even. The Rebirth in the title is making it so some tropers are just shoving the term everywhere, even when it's not needed or outright confusing. It creates more work for everyone, and cutting it off sooner rather than later would help matters (I actually regret not bringing it up when I first saw these pages).

I get that The Flash (2016) would have the one-shot. But in terms of consistency, it's just off. And the Batgirl thing you mentioned wouldn't be a problem given none of the pages I've mentioned feature a character who doesn't already have their own page without the (<year>) thing.

I guess an alternative would be to message tropers who make the problematic edits and hope we get rid of enough of the examples so that no one else picks up the habit, but that's wishful thinking. Still, if people are really against the rename for whatever reason (I haven't seen one that I haven't addressed), we can fall back on that.

edited 10th Jul '17 3:09:29 AM by FuzzyBarbarian

The real problem is the lack of distinction between ComicBook/ pages that are works and ComicBook/ pages that are characters.

Back on topic: Rebirth is being used here as a disambiguation, not a title. Regarding the naming of the 2011 continuity's pages as "New 52", that wouldn't technically be wrong, as they were all in the New 52 continuity for the duration of their run and very few, if any, of them had two runs with enough differences to merit two separate pages. Feel free to change any trope examples that use "Rebirth" in the title, however. That's blatantly wrong.

The lack of distinction between Comic Book pages being big character pages or pages for works relating to that character really needs to be sorted out. It's really disorganised, and even when it's made clear that a page is for series tropes only, people will still go and add character tropes.

And I get that it's a disambiguation. But it's in the title of the page and is being constantly mistaken for the title of the work, as seen in the examples. And it's VERY easy to clear up that an example is in the Rebirth era. It's literally as easy as saying "in the Rebirth era".

And, again, no page before these have ever needed these disambiguations. And the work pages themselves clearly state that they're part of the Rebirth relaunch. And other series that are part of the Rebirth relaunch don't have it (admittedly, those series are the first of their kind, e.g. Green Lanterns). And other comic examples generally just clarify "post-Crisis", "pre-New 52" and the like in the examples themselves (if it's even relevant). And they're causing mistakes that require cleanup.

But people seem resistant to changing the naming scheme (no doubt in part because it's gone on so long), so I guess we'll keep it. The Flash (2016) has gone this long without a page, anyway. At worst, it'll just be really specific, with Flash: Rebirth for the 2009 series and The Flash (Rebirth) for the 2016 ongoing (for the sake of consistency). But I at least am asking you guys to help remove examples that include comics that literally do not exist, e.g. "Superman: Rebirth #2" and the like. These kinds of things are a consequence of the naming scheme, after all.

edited 10th Jul '17 3:51:38 AM by FuzzyBarbarian