Talk:Captain Marvel (DC Comics)/Archive 2

SHAZAM is an acronym
SHAZAM is an acronym for various historical or mythilogical persons such as Solomon and Atlas, etc and their qualiies, ie:Solomon's wizdom, Atlas's strength, etc. Hercules? I forgot them all. Billy Batson was a crippled newsboy - perhaps later on he became a reporter, but I only read the original strips in the 40's.Billy used one crutch as he walked with his newspapers under his other hand. Perhaps Shazam, the wizard was the old guy who brought or met Billy in the cave containing the statues of the aforementioned characters and empowered him with super qualities. ```

Solomon, Hercules, Atlas, Zeus, Achilles, Moses
 * Moses? Try Mercury.  Billy was never crippled.  That was Freddy.72.209.53.196 (talk) 17:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

question
can we say the he is palyable in the New MK game i have proof http://worldscollide.com/podcasts/MKast_Ep02.mp3. --Lbrun12415 00:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Recent page Moves
Not sure why someone tried moving this to a search string no one is likely to use, but the character is Captain Marvel, not Shazam/Captain Marvel. Shazam is a proper disambiguation page already, which will help anyone looking for this character find him where he properly belongs, as is Captain Marvel. Per wikipedia's naming rules & Guidelines, this article is exactyl where it belongs. ThuranX (talk) 13:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep. As it stands "Captain Marvel (DC Comics)" meets WP:NCC and I notice the same user has moved quite a few pages and it'd be worth them checking with the relevant projects naming conventions too (as well as general ones) as a number look problematic (although the most problematic seem to have been reverted already). (Emperor (talk) 13:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Once again, despite the talk page, and the naming conventions, the page was moved. This is bordering on vandalism. ThuranX (talk) 16:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Three times in a day and a half. If it happens again we'd be within our rights to start issuing warnings. (Emperor (talk) 17:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC))


 * And the page has been move protected... jumping the gun or not. - J Greb (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Achilles
For a time in the 1990s, the magic of SHAZAM was said to bestow the agility of Achilles. I will try to look up references to specific issues.Khajidha (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

prolific?
"The most prolific of Captain Marvel's supporting characters at Fawcett was Mister Tawky Tawny..." I don't know what word should be there but prolific isn't it, unless whoever wrote that meant that Mr. TT had lots of babies. Fitfatfighter (talk) 07:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

JLU appearance
I've reinstated the edit that contributor ThuranX reverted out. I've done so not only because (s)he reinstated some pretty awful grammar and wording, but his/her comment: "try that again without deleting actual citations. thanks." aside from being fairly unpleasant was factually inaccurate. The text that ThuranX reinstated (bold text highlights the substance of his her edit)"


 * "Captain Marvel guest starred in the Justice League Unlimited episode "Clash" with Captain Marvel voiced by Jerry O'Connell and Billy Batson voiced by Shane Haboucha. He joins up with the Justice League and is first seen defeating Parasite and wrapping him up in a street light. When he meets other members, Superman pulls him away to where the other core members are and berates him for "endorsing" Lex Luthor. When Superman refuses to trust Lex Luthor when in Luthor's new housing project Lexor City, Captain Marvel intervenes and attempts to stop Superman. While Marvel realized that Superman is too much for him to handle (his attacks are outmatched and is constantly being pummeled by Superman; destroying Lexor City in the process), he was able hurt the Man of Steel by summoning two lightning bolts by shouting "Shazam!" repeatedly. However, Superman reversed the tables and transformed Captain Marvel back into Billy Batson by pulling Marvel into the path of the bolts. However, Luthor was proven innocent and Superman now looked upon as the saboteur of Lexor City (although Luthor and Cadmus had been conspiring to defame Superman and the Justice League in order to destroy them). Saying that they were no longer the heroes that he worshipped and now changed and rather callous, Captain Marvel resigned from the Justice League. The climactic fight sequence between Captain Marvel and Superman pays homage to the Superman/Captain Marvel battle from Mark Waid and Alex Ross' Kingdom Come miniseries, which was itself an homage to Mad Magazine's "Superduperman!", in which a parody of Superman fights "Captain Marbles", a parody of Captain Marvel (referencing the lawsuit between DC and Fawcett). (reference: Mad #4, April 1953)"

Note that the text states that the climactic fight sequence is an homage to earlier conflicts, each one an homage to a prior one. However, there exists no citation that explicitly states this. The citations instead only point to prior conflicts in other mediums. To me, that sounds like synthesis, wherein the writer is him or herself expressing that the fight here is a nod to prior conflicts by independently pointing them out in other media. We don't do that here. We find someone notable and citable who has made that observation. Doing so on our part constitutes original research. I'm open to discussing this, but I think I am on pretty firm ground here. That's why I made the edit that I did, as indicated here:

"Captain Marvel guest starred in the Justice League Unlimited episode "Clash" with Jerry O'Connell and Shane Haboucha providing the voice for Marvel and Billy Batson, respectively . He joins the Justice League and is first seen defeating Parasite and wrapping him up in a street light. When he meets other members, Superman and the other founding members privately criticize his apparent "endorsing" of Lex Luthor, a manipulative enemy of the League on many prior occasions. When Superman refuses to trust Lex Luthor when in Luthor's new housing project Lexor City, Captain Marvel intervenes and attempts to stop Superman. Marvel realizing that Superman has more experience at combat than he does, he summons the Shazam magical lightning bolts repeatedly. However, Superman quickly puts Marvel in the path of the bolts, reverting him to Batson. Later, claiming that his childhood heroes had grown callous and lost touch, Marvel resigns from the League."

Clean and concise. Encyclopedic. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

tougher than Superman Prime
Note to the anon IP 72.196.117.21: find a citation from a reliable source that says precisely that, and we're in business. Otherwise, we cannot include it, as it sounds an awful lot like original research. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 08:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Additional Sources
Whilst looking about for some images of Cap and Billy Batson together, I've been coming across a few sources. I'll add them below as I come across them; maybe someone can make use of them:


 * The religion of Captain Marvel
 * Regarding the CM feature film

- Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:42, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Images 2010
With 12 non-free images, I wanted to explore if there was anyway we could reduce a few. My current recommendation is to removed: File:Marvel-familt-lt-marvels.jpg, due to being a bit superfluous to the character of Capt. Marvel; File:Marvel White Costume2.jpg, as this is a fairly brief and swathed over version of the character; File:Billy-batson-magic-of-shazam-no1-2008.jpg, while this is a Capt Marvel series, it's not an especially notable Capt. Marvel series, let alone comic book series; and File:Supermanmarvel kingdomcome.jpg, as the Super/Marvel conflict is already explored earlier in the article (and there is an image of the two earlier in the article). -Sharp962 (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My opinion differs sharply, to pardon the pun. While I agree that the article uses far too many images as well, I think that the images that should remain are as follows:
 * the first image, the ashcan one, is superfluous, and offers nothing to the article.
 * the second image, featuring CM tossing a car - I think this is a good image, in comparing it to that of the character's primary marketing competitor, Superman.
 * the third image, that of the Marvel Family, seems highly valuable to the article, as it displays something unique - a family of superheroes. It is also the subject of much of the section where it resides.
 * the fourth image, the reintroduction fo CM by Superman, initially seems important, but better images reside in the article to contrast the two. It is notable only in that this is the only image to show Billy Batson, the alter ego of the hero.
 * the fifth image, showing CM's new costume - itself notable in that it is the first one in almost 70 years - is notable in and of itself.
 * the sixth image, featuring CM art by Kunkel, is superfluous.
 * the seventh and eighth images, showing the live-action portrayal of Bostwick (and oddly enough, not of Davey) and of the animated version of the character, seem very necessary to the tv section - they are first representations in their media. Of the two, the tv image is more valuable.
 * the ninth image, of Tyler's film portrayal seems on point for the same reason.
 * the tenth image, that of CM and Superman from Kingdom Come, addresses the Superman/CM friction.
 * Removing the non-necessary images leaves six or seven images; the Superman article features seven images, the Batman article features eight. These are amongst the earliest - and most popular - superheroes. I think the article could be well served by limiting the article to 6-7 images, though I think obtaining an image of Billy Batson would serve the article enormously - as noted in the article, one of the most commercially successful ploys of the character was that it would appeal to small boys, who could imagine themselves transformed into someone far more powerful than themselves.. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I've waited a week to see if there was any feedback on my comments. Seeing none, I've acted on my suggestions above and removed three of the ten images in the article. Again, finding an image of Billy Batson and CM would help the article enormously - how many other superheroes are secretly a kid, or gain their powers by getting struck by lightning? Not many, I'll wager. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. -Sharp962 (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2010 (UTC).
 * More or less, though there are some quibbles...
 * The Marvel family image isn't that solid as far as NFCC goes - the article text gets the information across just fine.
 * Lacking a comparison of Batson and Marvel is a failing point. And the DC "re-intorduction" issue fits that nicely.
 * Any "Suprtman vs Captain Marvel" image is on the same ground as the Marvel Family image - the text covers it fine, an image is just decoration.
 * - J Greb (talk) 21:25, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * While I can see your point in regards to the images, I think that the Superman vs. CM thing is pretty long-standing, and I think a side by side image is illustrative of this "conflict". As well, the Marvel family is demonstrative of the family-friendly nature of the character and his "relatives". I guess I am a little confused by your use of decorative, and how you differentiate between that and demonstrative. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 15:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It boils down to WP:NFCC and #8. The upshot is that images should not be used unless what they show cannot be clearly presented in text. For the most part it has been accepted for comic book characters that text falls short when describing character designs - what the primary or major costumes a character is shown in. But when talking about "family friendly", "extended cast", or "often used as a 'friendly' opponent of Superman", the text of the article is sufficient. Lack of an image does not hinder the understanding of a reader, even if it is a pleasant bonus. That makes the images, under Wikipedia policy, decorative and outside of how non-free images can be used.
 * And FWIW, I do like the idea of images in the articles, but I'm realistic about the policies and guidelines currently in place. Even if it does leave the articles a visually sparse.
 * - J Greb (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I remember reading that an image cannot be used in an article (and is decorative) is it is not supported by the text of the article. It's one o the reasons we don't have a picture of, say Dollman or a 1955 Plymouth Fury in the article. The image relates to the subject and assists the text in demonstrating an idea that the text itself cannot. Your view sounds the opposite of that. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * While that is true, it is a variation of NFCC#8 - a Dollman image would have zero contectual significance in this article. But NFCC#1's "...ask yourself: 'Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?' and 'Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?' If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion." would also make the use unsupported. That's where the use of "decoration" comes in. - J Greb (talk) 02:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, let's follow that. Clearly, they cannot be replaced by free images - this is true for practically every comic book made. As well, I don't believe that the text alone can illustrate the idea of an entire "family" of Marvels, nor the often tense relationship presented when Supes and Cap are featured together. Are they the very best images for the article? Perhaps not; I think one showing the two of them clobbering each other would be far more illustrative, or having a color image of the Marvels would cement the idea that they are a "family" unit. I still hold out hope that someone will find a good image of Batson and CM. Those would be great images fro the article. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:01, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem is that it gets hung up on point 1 - Can the text alone convey the information to a general reader? From what I'm seeing it can and does, making the family potrait and/or the "rivals" image unneded.
 * As for a Cap and Billy image - this is likely the best, content wise. Scan wise though...
 * - J Greb (talk) 04:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Improving Captain Marvel
Anybody interested improving the article I found these articles ,. Dwanyewest (talk) 05:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the following from the article as uncited:
 * "The 2010 DTV animated film Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths features a villainess named Superwoman, who is presented as an evil alternate universe version of Mary Marvel, complete with a "Super Family" of henchmen (Captain Super, Captain Super Jr. and Uncle Super). The Captain Marvel analogue, "Captain Super", is voiced by Jim Meskimen."

This has come up before, and the same issue of synthesis exists. We cannot (as editors) connect the Marvel family with the Super family, unless an external, reliable source makes that connection. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: 'the curse of Shazam'
I recently copyedited and did some cite and linking work to produce the following:
 * "DC comics recently announced that Captain Marvel will be joining The new 52 in a Justice League story to be titled "The Curse Of Shazam" in 2012.(ref) The writers for the stories will be Geoff Johns and Gary Frank.

Since then, an anon has reverted that edit twice in favor of the following:
 * "DC Comics recently announced that a back-up feature called "The Curse of Shazam" will start in Justice League #5 in 2012, written by Geoff Johns and drawn by Gary Frank. The feature will introduce Captain Marvel to the post-Flashpoint universe.(ref)"

They are very similar, but I think the first version works better, and is more readable. Can I get some others to weigh on with their preference? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The first is more readable but the second seems to have more information. How about this combination:
 * "DC comics recently announced that Captain Marvel will be joining The new 52 in a Justice League story in 2012. The story, titled "The Curse Of Shazam"(ref), will introduce Captain Marvel to the post-Flashpoint universe.(ref) It will be written by Geoff Johns and drawn by Gary Frank. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 03:19, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * That sounds great! Could I trouble you to post it yourself? I've reverted the non-responsive anon twice now, and I don't want to approach a 3R situation. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem, I'm on it! AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 03:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It's been confirmed that he'll no longer be called Captain Marvel: he's now called Shazam. Goodness knows how this will affect the title of this article...

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/geoff-johns-curse-of-shazam-120126.html

NP Chilla (talk) 18:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Defeinetly beter that the previous ref which was just the Newsarama wrtier musing on the avoidance of using "Captain Marvel" by Franks.
 * As for the name of this article - "Now officially Shazam" really doesn't trump 70+ years of it being otherwise.
 * - J Greb (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

So the character is being officially renamed Shazam, and is no longer called Captain Marvel
http://comics.ign.com/articles/122/1220011p1.html

It's not just a code-name switch either, in the rebooted DC U he will always have been named Shazam and not Captain Marvel.207.237.208.153 (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

THE SMOKING GUN PART TWO
I found the quote from the Fawcett "big wig" on the real reason why Fawcett settled out of court:

"In the beginning everyone was jumping onto the comic book bandwagon. There was no question that Captain Marvel derived from Superman . . . We had our Superman-type character just like everyone else had theirs. So why did Superman's publisher pick on us? Simply because we were beating them in sales! The lawsuits dragged on for years; there were three of them: We won the first, lost the second, won the third . . .but then there was a problem.  One artist, I don't know who, took either a page or a panel from Superman comics and traced it exactly . . . and simply inserted Marvel where Superman was.  That killed us. We settled out of court.  We paid them $400,000.  The settlement said that we do not admit to copying Superman but promised never to publish Captain Marvel ever again."

P.C. Hamerlinck, "The Fawcetts Could Do It As Well, Or Better, Than Anybody": The Roscoe K. Fawcett Interview, in Fawcett Companion: The Best of FC 13 (Paul Hamerlinck, ed., TwoMorrows Publishing 2001) (quoting Fawcett circulation director Roscoe Kent Fawcett).

The argument that "it wasn't worth the fight" never rang true. Fawcett had the power to drag the lawsuit on if they wanted to until DC ran out of the financial resources to continue. Also, if "declining sales" were the issue, they could have just cancelled most of the satellite titles while contnuing to publish Marvel Family and Captain Marvel Adventures. Even with "declining sales" the Captain Marvel books were still their best sellers so, without Cap, they just decided to get out of comic books entirely because it was just one division of their publishing empire.MARK VENTURE (talk) 15:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Marvelman section - Not sure how this is how it ":went down"!?
During the Warrior run that I purchased, the magazine line released a Summer Special. Right on the cover - found a picture googling "marvelman special" - it clearly said "Marvelman Special No. 1". It was my understanding that the British-branch of Marvel Comics jumped on this with a law suit claiming "confusing in the market place" because the magazine had "Marvel" on the cover. The way I heard it, the British-branch of Marvel Comics didn't even discuss the situation with the home-branch of Marvel Comics until they had instigated the lawsuit. There is even a mention of this bringing an end to Warrior comics as a whole on the Warrior (comics) wiki page here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrior_(comics) - but it seems to imply that the lawsuit didn't happen until the comic was printed in the US - which was years later. I'd like to see some more clarification/references as to exactly when the lawsuits against Mavelman began. I don't see a mention of the "Marvelman Special No. 1" in the Warrior (comics) article. As I stated before, you can google it and see a picture of the cover. I can find references to a "threatening letter from Marvel Comics" after the release of "Marvelman Special No. 1" perhaps there was only the "threat of a lawsuit". None-the-less, this seems to be the pivotal point when the pressure from Marvel Comics began against the use of "Marvelman" on the cover as they had not complained about there being a character named Marvelman inside of Warrior magazine on an on-going basis before the release of "Marvelman Special No. 1". [I figure they could have kept calling him "Marvelman" inside of the comic if they would have put "Kimota" on the cover, right? - but maybe then DC Comics would have tried to sue?] <- more or less irrelevant, but related to why it is being placed in this article about "Captain Marvel"WereTech (talk) 19:21, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

The name change.
The title of this article should likely not change (unless, I would argue ,the character becomes substantially popular as "Shazam"), but it should be stated clearly that the name change is not restricted to the "New 52" continuity. According to this interview by [DC Comics Chief Creative Officer Geoff Johns http://www.newsarama.com/8995-exclusive-geoff-johns-hopes-lightning-strikes-shazam.html], "Shazam" will be the character's name "from now on"; this also applies to his appearance in Injustice: Gods Among Us and any other future outside media.

Also, remember your audience when writing Wikipedia articles. Many of the people who will stumble upon this article do not read comic books and do not know what a "New 52" is in the first place. Even in that case, "also known as 'Shazam'" is still a correct statement, and one that is qualified and explained later in the lead as well. All too often, I find comic book articles dense with in-universe comic book fan language, and references to things and concepts that need to be explained or omitted from an general encyclopedia article. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I also support keeping the name Captain Marvel. I think putting this template, faq, on top of this page should help, and/or using a separate notes section as seen on the Star Trek page might help clear that confusion. I am going to change "also known as" into "recently renamed" Oldag07 (talk) 03:52, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * "Recently renamed" is not good form for an encyclopedia article; considering how long Captain Marvel merchandise has been sold under the name "Shazam!" (unlike the comics, they commonly do not even use the words "Captain Marvel" on the merchandise), "also known as" works fine. Also, there have been problems recently with people going back and forth on changing "Captain Marvel" to "Shazam", the order of either if used together, etc. We may need to set some definitive rules on editing this article, like with the FAQ suggested. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 22:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I think Shazam should be listed first, followed by something along the lines of "formerly known as Captain Marvel." What's cannon should be what's presented, and the New 52 is the current cannon. --Bentonia School (talk) 15:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * An encyclopedia article should arguably be more concerned with historical weight rather than canon. However, it does appear that DC is going to stick wit hthe name change. When they actually greenlight a Shazam! movie, I think that would be the best time to change name of the page. I would also at the time suggest splitting out the history section into its own History of Shazam! article (leaving a summarized version focusing squarely on the publication history of Billy Batson/Captain Marvel (this oen tends to cover the entire Marvel Family/Shazam! franchise as a whole), and the media section into Shazam! in other media. We would also need to discuss whether the article is going to Shazam (comics) or to Shazam! (with the exclamation point, which is DC's full trademark for the series and character). --24.30.23.106 (talk) 23:18, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

At this point, with the lead changing every few days, I think it's a good time to make a definitive plan involving the name. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 01:35, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Captain Marvel serial
"Often ranked among the finest examples of the form..." In whose opinion? It's a highly unoriginal serial that recycles the hackneyed "ten little Indians" plot, rather than using the comic-book characters (such as Dr Sivana) in an original story. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 16:30, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You are right; it has been removed, as a reference had been requested almost two years ago. If no one can muster up the gumption to go and find one in all that time, it doesn't get to stay. Thanks for pointing it out, WilliamS. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

With all due respect to the contributor, the comment should be restored. Many film-critics, often and consistently, cite "The Adventures of Captain Marvel" as one of the top 3 greatest movie serials of all time, often exchanging positions from list to list in that Top 3 with "The Perils of Nyoka" and "King of The Rocket-Men". The source of the plot is irrelevant to the staying power of the serial. In the mid-80s, I bought my double-VHS copy of the serial because it had a quote, I believe by Leonard Maltin, who described it as one of the greatest or the greatest movie serial of all time, which is why I bought it. I don't know if that was the precise quote but I valued and still value Mr.Maltin's opinion. It's kind of difficult to "muster up the gumption" if most of these lists usually appear on television more than in print.MARK VENTURE (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC) From the Wikipedia article: The Adventures of Captain Marvel:

Critical reception[edit]

Harmon and Glut claim that Adventures of Captain Marvel is "unquestionably one of the finest movie serials ever made, possible the best with the exception of the three Flash Gordon epics."[6] Cline describes this as one of the most outstanding of all serials[11] and Republic's "masterpiece."[7] He writes that Tyler's "striking performance...remains in thousands of minds as the most memorable serial hero of all time - bar none."[12] — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARK VENTURE (talk • contribs) 14:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, Mark. Good to see you back! Where do these quotes come from. If we can cite them, we can use them in the article. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm terribly sorry I never responded, I forgot all about it! The quotes are from the Wikipedia entry of The Adventures of Captain Marvel movie serial. Whoever wrote the article knew their stuff and managed to find written sources while mine were only from T.V. episodes of Siskel and Ebert or Entertainment Tonight! If you look at the section I quoted you will see numbers indicating footnotes. Here are those footnotes which contain the sources:

6. Harmon, Jim; Donald F. Glut (1973). "9. The Superheroes "Could Superman Knock Out Captain Marvel"". The Great Movie Serials: Their Sound and Fury. Routledge. pp. 219, 222, 223, 226, 227, 230. ISBN 978-0-7130-0097-9.

7. Cline, William C. (1984). "9. They Who Also Serve (The Citizens)". In the Nick of Time. McFarland & Company, Inc. p. 142. ISBN 0-7864-0471-X.

11. Cline, William C. (1984). "3. The Six Faces of Adventure". In the Nick of Time. McFarland & Company, Inc. p. 37. ISBN 0-7864-0471-X.

12. Cline, William C. (1984). "5. A Cheer for the Champions (The Heroes and Heroines)". In the Nick of Time. McFarland & Company, Inc. p. 83. ISBN 0-7864-0471-X.

Hope this helps and again, I'm sorry for the late response.MARK VENTURE (talk) 23:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Article/character name and usage
With DC Comics' reintroduction of "Captain Marvel" as part of their "New 52" revamp in 2012, he was officially renamed "Shazam", a name that is used not only in the comics but in the character's subsequent appearances in animated productions such as Justice League: War and DC Nation (Young Justice, already in production when the change was made, uses the previous version and moniker of Captain Marvel) and in video games such as Injustice: Gods Among Us. As a result, for the last two years, the lead and infobox for this article have been in a constant state of flux; I have seen each of the following as the lead sentence - back and forth - over the years:
 * Captain Marvel, is a fictional superhero who appears in American comic books published by DC Comics.
 * Captain Marvel, also known as Shazam, is a fictional superhero who appears in American comic books published by DC Comics.
 * Shazam, also known as Captain Marvel, is a fictional superhero who appears in American comic books published by DC Comics.

The infobox as well has been in a constant state of flux - attempts have been made to acknowledge both names - i.e. "Shazam (Captain Marvel)" - in the header, but this again has been constantly edited back and forth, often without attribution.

Now, I understand that a lot of comic book fans are upset at the renaming and redesign of the character, but personal biases should not play into soft-sell edit wars such as this. I think it would be best to find an acceptable way to present both names that can be stuck to, acknowledging this character's 70-year history as "Captain Marvel" and his future appearances in most incarnations going forward for the time being as "Shazam" (I understand that he will appear as Captain Marvel, not Shazam, in the upcoming - and long delayed - Multiversity miniseries). Having the wording change every time I click this article for no other reason than personal preference is not acceptable. Discussion may also need to be extended to the picture used in the infobox, an Alex Ross depiction of Captain Marvel circa 2000 (that I originally uploaded) versus what Shazam looks like today, as to whether this needs to be updated or left alone.

This issue may also affect the naming of the article itself - that is, whether or not it needs to be renamed "Shazam (DC Comics)" or "Shazam! (DC Comics)" - and also what to do with Shazam (character), which redirects to Shazam (wizard), the article about the hero's benefactor (who is still apparently also named "Shazam" in his new incarnation). --FuriousFreddy (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC)


 * From what I understand, the character has been named Shazam ever since DC took it over in the 1970s, since Marvel holds the trademark for Captain Marvel. In that case, he's been Shazam decades longer than he was Captain Marvel. On the other hand, Captain Marvel at his peak, appearing in many different media, was much bigger and well-known than Shazam ever has been. A conundrum, truly. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:49, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Marvel did register the trademark for "Captain Marvel" in 1967, between Captain Marvel's final Fawcett appearance in 1953 and his first DC appearance in 1973, but the original Fawcett/DC character continued to be called "Captain Marvel" in DC publications up until 2012 (his sidekicks also continued to be called "Mary Marvel", "Captain Marvel Jr.", "Uncle Marvel", etc. up until this point in comics and in appearances on television and in direct-to-DVD productions). However, DC could not call the books he appeared in Captain Marvel or promote the character as "Captain Marvel", so the trademark Shazam! (with the exclamation point) was always used instead. Comic book titles included Shazam!, The Power of Shazam!, and Shazam! The New Beginning, and all merchandize always said "Shazam!" instead of "Captain Marvel". This complication - and a desire to have more cross-media ready properties - led to DC giving up and renaming the hero "Shazam". They actually first attempted this in 2006, by promoting Captain Marvel Jr. to the main hero and calling him "Shazam", but the change didn't stick and writers eventually started referring to the character as "Captain Marvel" again. The New 52 reboot in 2011 (Shazam did not appear in the rebooted comic line until the following year) gave DC the opportunity to start from square one and make the name change permanent. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 03:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that the reason behind maintaining the character name as Shazam in the New 52 relaunch was due to the name being more popularly recognised in association with the character than the name Captain Marvel, due to the titles of the comics, the 70s tv series, etc. That, of course, does not mean that the character has accurately been referred to as such until the relaunch in 2011, but it does give some insight into the recognition behind the name. With the movie now green lit, I expect that this will become more pertinent. We have two questions when dealing with this issue - by what name the character is POPULARLY known by, and which one he is ACCURATELY known by. In order to balance both needs, I would support the article reading "Shazam (also known as Captain Marvel", which obliges both of the above points while still maintaining the history of the subject. Justin.Parallax (talk) 08:56, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that formatting (and not "formerly known as", to cover things like Multiversity). For the record, the lead sentence just changed again within the last two days. I'm gonna look for a tag to put on the article itself.--FuriousFreddy (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. The comic title has had "Shazam" in it, originally with "The Original Captain Marvel" as a subtitle, because of Marvel Comics' counterpart. The character has been Captain Marvel up to Flashpoint and the New 52. --Joe Sewell (talk) 17:44, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * What do you propose be done with the wizard, whose name has always been Shazam? (I haven't followed the New 52, so I have no idea what the wizard's name is now.) That could add to the potential confusion with a name change. Also consider what happened back when the Legion of Super-Heroes had many of their names changed & changed back. Did their articles get retitled? --Joe Sewell (talk) 17:44, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no need for the page on the wizard character to change, that one is clear as to which character it is in reference to. We also cannot attempt to predict any future changes to this or other characters' names, WP is not a crystal ball. I strongly feel that the opening sentence "Shazam, also known as Captain Marvel" is the best choice here.Justin.Parallax (talk) 09:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * support #2 or #3. I know him as Captain Marvel, but only because I inherited my Uncle's gold/silver age collection. But if hes been Shazam and going to be shazam going forward, both names certainly should be mentioned. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Arcade game
"Taito's 1987 Superman arcade game featured 2-player cooperative gameplay, and if two players were active in the game at any time, the second "Superman" was modeled after Captain Marvel in a not-quite-subtle fashion. The same character model was used, but the sprite was colored in red, gold, and white, identical to Captain Marvel. The only inaccuracy was the chest emblem, which remained the traditional Superman "S" as opposed to the Shazam lightning bolt."

Hardly.

http://i47.tinypic.com/2it55w3.jpg

That looks nothing like Captain Marvel. Where's the gold cuffs? What's with the white boots? And Cap doesn't wear man panties.76.181.243.26 (talk) 21:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The developers used the same character model as Superman but the color scheme was intended to invoke Captain Marvel. Remember that DC had licensed the rights to Captain Marvel back in the 70s and I would assume this was an extension of that license. To be frank, I had never heard of Captain Marvel before playing this game but my friends who had IMMEDIATELY recognized him and thought it was one of the coolest things about the game. In fact, if it wasn't for this game I wouldn't even know who Captain Marvel is or what the word "Shazam" is referencing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.36.242 (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

The Beatles
This article has a "Captain Marvel in Popular Culture" section. I think this section should include the Beatles' song "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill" which includes the line "Captain Marvel zapped him right between the eyes." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.217.144 (talk) 08:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have a reference that the 1968 song is referencing Big Red? The Other Captain Marvel made his cartoon debut a year earlier. You need a refernce connecting the two - it makes it both notable and clear. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:39, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

This particular section also erroneously claims "this marks the only occasion in which a comic book character is mentioned in a Beatles song." Aside from being an irrelevant comment, it completely ignores the fact that there are entire Beatles songs specifically NAMED after other comic book characters, such as "Magneto and Titanium Man". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.33.206.75 (talk) 17:57, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * "Magneto and the Titanium Man" was by Paul McCartney and Wings, not the Beatles. WaxTadpole (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Captain Marvel (DC Comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ugo.com/games/best-heroes-of-all-time?page=4

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)