Talk:Batman emblem

Fair use rationale for Image:Batmanserial1943.JPG
Image:Batmanserial1943.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Batemblem.jpg
Image:Batemblem.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Batmanlogo.jpg
Image:Batmanlogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Where are the pictures of the different logos??
Right now the article is pointless if you can't see the actual logo's —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.70.235.127 (talk) 04:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required
This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 15:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Redirect
I support the redirect of the article to Batman by User:WesleyDodds. I don't think there's enough written about the symbol to justify a Wikipedia article. I don;t think there's enough material to meet WP:N, and I'm also unclear how exactly we write about it without breaching WP:NOR. We can't speculate, analyse or synthesise. Hiding T 11:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. This is exactly the sort of thing that can make an excellent section, but a very lousy article subject. --erachima talk 11:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * In that vein, it may have been better to fold it into Batsuit first. I know Wesley has mentioned he'd like to see that wind up as a redirect as well, but it may be best to see if both are salvageable as a single article before trying to find a way to ad a line or two, if that, to the very large article on the character. - J Greb (talk) 23:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Most of the information is verifiable. From the primary sources, at the very least. And does no one believe that articles have been written concerning the symbol? - jc37 09:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * But is the article creating a novel narrative? WP:NOR used to have a quote from Jimmy on this, it has gone but they're using a different one, "Some who completely understand why Wikipedia ought not create novel theories of physics by citing the results of experiments and so on and synthesizing them into something new, may fail to see how the same thing applies to history." That also applies to writing about fiction. We should also rely on reliable, published secondary sources. I agree that this should be a section somewhere, and maybe we need an article on the Iconography of Batman.  I would suspect that has a lot of scholarly research.  But rather than put the cart before the horse, maybe we should research before we write? Reading through the article, we have a section on cultural ubiquity which either needs sourcing or is original research, we have analytical claims in the section on the original version, and again in the 1964 version.  All we can do with primary source is describe, so we're left saying it was drawn like this in this issue by this artist, and then stayed the same until they added yellow in this issue, and then it stayed the same until they dropped the yellow in this issue... okay, I'm exaggerating a little, but only a little. You can't claim in one section that artistic differences are variations and in the next claim they are re-designs without recourse to secondary sources. And if the sources exist, well, at what point do we say where are they? Yes, it's the conundrum; do we sit on stuff we feel will get sourced or do we clean it up? Hiding T 10:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So your concern is a suggested relationship of the emblems?
 * I'm looking through the page (the version prior to the redirect), and I see a fair amount of "extra" commentary which should be removed, and a few statements that could use cites, but I still see a decent stub article, even after that.
 * I'll do a work-up, to show what I mean. - jc37 23:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)