Follow TV Tropes
Because it's been years since Season 2, and Outsiders largely assumes you know everything about the previous two seasons with the trailer not even hiding Wally's death and other spoilers, I propose that the spoilers for Seasons 1 & 2 should be unmarked due to It Was His Sled making all of this common knowledge and out of date.
However, there are so many spoiler marks that removing all of them will be a very long task (over 170 in Young Justice: The Team - Season One alone), so I wanted to see what others think before I do this.
Am I the only one who thinks we should give the Reach their own subpage instead of leaving them stuck in a folder in "Other Villains"? They pretty much split the role of Big Bad with the Light during the second season, after all.
Should we put Black Beetle on the "Minions of the Light" page? It's obvious that's who Sportsmaster's new partner is.
I'm trying to figure out where to add Wade Eiling and Henry Yarrow. They at first appear to be heroic characters but their stories in the tie-in comic lead to their being revealed as villains in the end. Where do they go, other heroes or villains?
come on guys, I need an answer here.
The only option I can think to do is to make an "other characters" tab for characters who don't have a set category.
If you guys disagree with this, please say so.
Appreciate the effort in revamping the character page, but have some misgivings also.
How do we know the new characters are actually part of the YJ Team, instead of being guest stars?
On the page for those, the folder title "First appearing in Season 2" is inaccurate if one wants to split hairs, since some of them were shown as civilians.
How To Write An Example and Not This Trope:
I'm curious, why next to several characters names do we have things like B01, 02, and L3? When did they become numbers?
They're given numbers in the show when the computer refers to them.
...Huh, chalk that up to my "Things I should notice but never do" list.
How come we don't have a Hey its that Voice for the show? Nolan North, Crispin Freeman,...um Cyborg from Teen Titans voice actor as Aqualad. Jesse Mc Carthy. All this people are/should be well known in nerd-dom.
We DO. It's under Trivia.
Is the Clayface we saw actually Matt Hagen in this universe? Where did that come from?
Maybe after the years of Insanity, the human part of him had finally and completly disolved. I see from the way he acts, with no jokes or witty lines, that he couldn't be the Clay Face we've come to know and love. You also must take into consideration that difrent authors use alot of the same characters in difrent ways. Take for instance batman. He's been the cryptic, avenger of the night, Dark Night. Then he turns right around in another production to become a goffy, line throwing Parody of himself in Batman:The Brave and the Bold. In summary, it may be Clayface original. It may be Clayface re-edited. it may be a new clayborn, mad, creature.
Am I the only one who sees several similarities between Artemis and Cassandra Cain? I mean, parents in the league of assasins, half-asian, badass normal, Dad who trained her to kill, and did insane tests for her?
Where did the stuff about the Joker and Lucas Carr come from? To my knowledge, the latter has only been shown as a teacher, and the former hasn't even shown up in the show, yet.
Is this from Word of God, or what?
It's from the comic book tie-in to the show, which counts as a combination of Word of God and All in the Manual. It includes additional information that is canon to the show's continuity.
- Superboy hasn't adopted the name Conner Kent yet, but aside from the comics, the official site bios confirm he will, in time. But until he actually does so in the show, what to do?
- But if we're going to be strict about the flow of info from the show, many characters such as the villains haven't been called by their real names.
- This relates to spoilers regarding a future plot point. Last episode, Artemis's surname was revealed for eagle-eyed viewers, and anyone can deduce this plot point from reading the page, but her surname hasn't been spoken out loud in the show. What to do?
- Jay Garrick and Iris West appeared last episode also as part of the "Flash Family". Shouldn't they be in the list despite having no lines?
The wiki is not based solely on the source material. If it's mentioned in the show in even a little way it can go in the wiki. If it's in any official material outside the show or from Word of God it can go in the wiki even if it's not in the show. Connor Kent was cited in the official bios, Artemis Crock popped up in the show last episode, and villain names have been in the credits even if they weren't spoken out loud, so they are all fair game on the wiki.
Now when people start using the comics as sources that's a problem because we don't know if Artemis' mother is called Paula Brooks (and wouldn't she at least be called Paula Brooks Crock given that Artemis' last name is Crock?) or that Ojo is blind since there is not source in or outside the show of that. The show isn't following the comics so unless it is basic for a important character, like Batman's parent being murdered, it shouldn't be listed on the page.
I hesitate to include minor villains or characters who were basically props. For one, they likely won't come back and two it's hard to find tropes for them outside their comic book versions since they hardly had any screen time. Ocean Master for one. All we saw was a silhouette of him in a brief expo story, nothing more. Unless he shows up again I think he should not be on the character page. Same goes for Starro who wasn't even confirmed as being the thing Black Manta was after.
Fair points, though I'd just like to add that part of the fun of the show is seeing all the DC characters used (just like JLU).
In regard to the Paula Crock example you listed, Artemis' mother was listed as Paula Crock in the credits of Downtime.
The reason I moved the character pics to the right is because left-justified pictures make the page a lot more spaced out than is necessary. Right justification won't interfere with the bullet points.
What "looks better" is subjective, but I didn't see any reason to force all of that space.
True, it doesn't mess with the bullet points but, on my computer at least, it messes with the page's horizontal length forcing me to unnecessarily scroll over. My suggestion would be to shrink the pictures so they aren't so ridiculously large like they currently are. That way the white space wouldn't be so prevalent. I would have done it earlier but I've been busy.
Because I watch the show. This isn't about some random bars put on a website, this is about a tv show. And in that tv show, she has never shown super strength. It's as simple as that. I want proof, and some random stats aren't proof. Actions are what I want, and you've yet to justify super strength through action
How about a compromise. We'll add super strength, but point out that that's from the stats and not seen in the show. How does that sound?
Now you're finally being diplomatic. Yes, I'm fine with that.
Miss Martian should not have the super strength trope. The simple truth is, it all comes down to the show. The stats say Wally's smart, and then the show proved that by SHOWING his scientific knowledge. The tv series hasn't shown her displaying any kind of super strength. At all. The stats indicate she's strong, yes. But there's a world of difference between strong and super strong. When Miss Martian actually SHOWS off a feat of impossible strength, we'll add it. But until that day comes, quit being an ass and leave it off.
You're the one being an ass by calling me one. There's no need to be rude, just make your case.
There is no rule that says that tropes have to be based on the show alone. The website is an official source for the show so it is not fan misinformation. Miss Martian is clearly shown to be almost three times as strong as Artemis who is a Badass Normal close to her age so it's pretty safe to say that qualifies as Super Strength. There can be an It's All There in the Manual disclaimer which is what that trope is there for.
On I Have No Son!, I see a few examples of children who were disowned because one parent simply didn't want them, not just because they were a disappointment. This could be a case of Trope Decay, so I've already brought it up on that trope's discussion page. But in the meantime, it beard discussion here, too. In Superman's case, this would be the same as a woman who wakes up from a coma and finds out she gave birth or a man who discovers that a woman stole his sperm while he slept. The circumstances, while extreme, aren't exactly exclusive.
It sounds like Trope Decay to me because from what I read of the definition, this trope is suppose to mean to disown and since Superman never "owned" Superboy in the first place, I don't believe it counts.
The very wording of the trope name itself indicates that the parent no longer, or never did, acknowledge their offspring (though by the definition of cloning, Superboy is closer in blood relation as a twin brother than a son) but Superman isn't pretending that Superboy doesn't exist, he's avoiding him because he freaks him out. And he's right about not being Superboy's father, because he isn't! Brother maybe, but not father. The only reason they are treating this like a parental issue is because (1)Superboy is a teen and (2)he had no other life but being like Superman. If Superboy was like, say, Bizarro no one would be claiming that Clark was his father.
I can agree with the Trope Decay argument on principle, so I'll ignore that part.
However, I disagree with the idea that Superboy isn't Superman's "son" because of the strict definition of the term. In nature, offspring can be perfect genetic copies of the "parent", but this definition of the term "offspring" is something that until now human beings have been exempt from. Superboy may be genetically identical to Superman (that is, unless he follows his post-Geoff Johns comic book origin exactly), but that isn't mutually exclusive from being his progeny.
Okay, so throwing out the strict definition of what a son actually is, then how is Superman Superboy's father? He didn't create him, he didn't raise him. At most Superman is an unknowing Glorified Sperm Donor. His ties to the kid are fleeting.
I guess my problem with including the trope under Superman's character sheet is that it paints him as neglectful father and/or a dead beat dad, which he is neither on the show because the situation is so screwed up.
In Schooled, I don't think the situation with Superboy was about him insisting on Clark acknowledging that he's a son. My impression was that Superboy wanted a mentor who was like him to help guide him. Now that is something I think Superman should consider doing but pushing the parent angle seems to just manufacture the angst.
Well, I brought this up in the Young Justice topic. It's not really that what Superman's doing isn't understandable, but it's still pretty Jerkass. Like I said, this would be the equivalent of a person who wakes up from a coma and finds out they were raped and have a kid. Superboy doesn't seem to want Superman to raise him or anything, but he obviously wants to be like him and Superman's refusal to mentor him is a point of angst. (Yeah, I know, that's what you said.) Really, the main problem is that Superboy is a kid crying for help to the one person in the world who can help him, but Superman is too Squicked out to see it.
I don't like comparing the show this way, but it needs to be said that this is especially grating when you look at the comics version of Superman, who handled it much better, going out of his way to give the kid the thumbs up shortly after he got better and even taking Superboy to meet and live with his parents. When that version of Superboy first started learning how to use his heat vision and failed (it was like trying to use a gun with no training), Superman showed up and gave him some pointers and then took him to the spot where he used to train on his own. In YJ, he one second berates Superboy for not controlling his power properly and then tells him he doesn't want to to teach him, telling him that Batman and Canary, probably the main two people in the League who can't identify with Superboy's level of power, will do so instead.
So, in summation: Superman's actions while understandable and not strictly "deadbeat", are pretty Jerk Assish and can't quite be justified.
It just doesn't fall under Jerkass territory for me. His behavior is completely understandable and a completely human response. It feels like a case of blaming the victim. He's had his DNA stolen without his permission and it was used to create a living being, and now people are expecting him to take care of this being like he had some kind of hand in his creation, which he didn't.
While I think the father analogy is wrong to be used here, I do agree with you that Superman should be open to mentoring him, instead of leaving him to Black Canary, Red Tornado and Batman, but I think part of the reason he hasn't so far is because he just isn't coping well. His talk with Batman in the diner was leading that way right up until Bruce made that stupid remark about Clark being Connor's father. Instead of hitting such a personal nerve, Bruce really should have tried a more logical argument.
Superman has to have time to get over the emotional confusion and trauma and understand that he is the best person to guide Connor. I'm sure they will soon find a middle ground, it has only been a few weeks between Schooled and the pilot.
So are we done with the I Have No Son! trope, then? If it's just the mentor angle, then this trope really doesn't fit at all.
Being understandable and human doesn't make it less Jerkass. In fact, being Jerkass is arguably part of being "human", from certain points of view. Like I said, I understand that Superman has been essentially violated (it's not quite the same as rape—that's a completely different animal), but that is neither here nor there. I can understand why a man would hit his wife if she cheated on him, but that wouldn't make it less wrong.
Yes, I'm sure Superman will come around (he's Superman), but that isn't what tropes are about either. This is the way he's acting within the episodes in question, future episodes notwithstanding.
And really, I need to hear something from the other trope's discussion page before I can give a solid answer there. In the meantime, I think I'll make another YKTTW while we wait.
But it's morally and lawfully wrong for a man to hit his wife. Superman's reaction was neither of those. He was with in his rights to refuse Superboy. There is nothing that morally or legally makes Connor Superman's responsibility. He's not treating Connor like a freak or pretending he doesn't exist, he just isn't ready to let him into his life with open arms quite yet.
But it's possible to be within your rights and still be wrong. I've seen judges say so all the time in actual court cases: it's possible to lawfully right and morally wrong at the same time.
The thing is that Superboy is a kid in desperate need of help that only Superman can provide, but Superman's personal feelings are blinding him to that. I understand that he didn't ask for it and he might not feel ready, but that's kind of the point of being one of the good guys. To paraphrase another Lawful Good character : "Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing."
BTW, I made that YKTTW: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=h4a3lao8e66e18uk52ikqw7u
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?