Talk:Arrowette

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by DC Comics work group.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

"Fanon"?[edit]

Please explain how Green Arrow being her father could be "fanon" enough to mention. It's a popular theory, but even most people that think it should be true admit that it's just a theory. Fanon in the original sense implies that something is so widely held in the fandom that most fans don't even realise it was never stated in canon. Yes, you can use "fanon" these days to mean that a small particular group of fans believes it, fine, but almost anything can be fanon with that definition. I just think if you're going to be using the term in other articles it should be kept to a minimum, used for those cases where most fans don't even realize it's not canon.D1Puck1T 07:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Young Justice #34, page 13, panel 2: http://i6.tinypic.com/149w6bs.jpg - ExcaliDragon 08:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little context: the person talking is an attention seeking glory-hound, and Arrowette calls her a "kidder" for saying it. The way it's done is clearly enough to fuel the fires of speculation, but "speculation" is the word that should be used.D1Puck1T 04:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up[edit]

I changed all tenses to the present, and added an infobox for Miss Arrowette. I also tried to tone down the speculation in the "Parentage" section, leaving mostly the bits that included issue citations. Right now, I think the paragraph comes across as just reporting the fan spec, not endorsing it. Konczewski 18:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne isn't her real name[edit]

In Young Justice when she gives Secret the name Suzie Ciss says that it was one of the names she made up because she disliked the name Cissie.76.15.11.36 14:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Profile picture[edit]

The profile picture used for Cissie King-Jones is not from an actual issue of YJ as stated in the picture description. Rather, it is a bit of fanart made by a rather prolific artist. It's doubtful that the artist gave permission for his work to be used (unless he was the one that uploaded it). Maybe an actual panel picture of Cissie should be used, rather than someone's fanart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.29.188 (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I recognized right away that it wasn't an official artwork, but fanart from the artist "gb2k." I also highly doubt his permission was used. 66.168.77.22 (talk) 20:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Permision" Isn't really needed if the fair use rationale is correct. If it had been uploaded as "PD or CC3.0, then there would be an immediate issue.

It would be a good idea to get an image of the more common appearance of the character from the comics which is actually from one of the comics.

- J Greb (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arrowette. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050225223212/http://spider-bob.com/heroes/dc/Arrowette.htm to http://spider-bob.com/heroes/dc/Arrowette.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]