Talk:List of Batman: The Animated Series episodes

Individual Pages For Episodes
You guys need to bring back the individual pages for the episodes. Wikipedia is about pop culture, and people should be able to look up these episodes if they want. They're a great resource for those doing reviews, or for those that are just interested in these episodes. A lot of live action television shows have individual pages for each episodes, so is it simply because this show is a cartoon? ZGDestroyer of Worlds

How about instead of complaining about people removing the old, trivia-heavy episode articles, people start making new, good quality articles? That's what I've been working on. I'm only doing ones that I can find reviews and other notable information on, to comply with the notability guidelines, which is still quite a few. Euchrid (talk) 08:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * General observations:
 * Long standing consensus from WP:TV is that title cards are unacceptable NFC content.
 * Five pf the articles you've worked on you recreated after they had been deleted/redirected by consensus.
 * A number of the references used are problems waiting to happen. IMDb and TV.com are considered unreliable. Blogs are questionable (AV Club and Retro Junk) at best. ToonZone has also been a grey are.
 * 1 line fluf Reception sections in no way justify article's as plot dumps.

- J Greb (talk) 15:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Sub Articles for Episodes
Personally I think the sub articles for the episodes should be returned. They're useful for reviewing purposes. Why do regular TV shows get sub pages? Is there a bias against cartoons?-ZGDK

Removal of sub articles for episodes
I would suggest that this show does not merit separate wiki pages for each episode, and that those pages are fairly repetitive now (each has a long list of reference links which are identical and therefore unnecessary). The same is being done by consensus at List of Justice League episodes, where airdate information and the like can all go onto one page. Dyslexic agnostic 05:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Help needed in Justice League Unlimited
If somebody is interested in Justice League Unlimited, please go to the List of Justice League episodes to help fix that page, meet this one's high quality standarts.Some users refuse to expand info and create article per episodes, even though they know the existence of the wikiproject and well developed pages like the sub-articles here.--T-man, the wise 02:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)--T-man, the wise 02:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

About the problem previously pointed above, there is a whole list of examples of ther lists of episodes doing the same as this, in Talk:List of Justice League episodes. If the episodes already have a page each, you can summarize the info here and expand it more on the subarticle.--T-man, the wise 02:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Change order
The main reason is that authors didn't intent the order on wich the episodes actually aired.

Prove of this is the fact that they used the one they originally planned on the DVDs:

Disc 1 - On Leather Wings, Christmas With The Joker, Nothing to Fear, The Last Laugh, Pretty Poison, The Underdwellers, P.O.V. Disc 2 - The Forgotten, Be a Clown, Two Face: Part One, Two Face: Part Two, It's Never Too Late, I've Got Batman in my Basement, Heart of Ice Disc 3 - The Cat and the Claw: Part One, The Cat and the Claw: Part Two, See No Evil, Beware the Gray Ghost, Prophecy of Doom, Feat of Clay: Part One, Feat of Clay: Part Two Disc 4 - The Joker's Favor, Vendetta, Fear of Victory, The Clock King, Appointment in Crime Alley, Mad as a Hatter, Dreams in Darkness

Whenever the series is re-run in order that's the followed order. The producers intended characters and events appear in certain order, I'd like to keep it as a way to pay respect. How ever the airdate is data we can't change. We'd be following the production order but still mentioning the airdate. (this is one of the few series with such problem)--T-man, the wise 08:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Name of the episodes
Here is how all the episodes should be named--T-man, the wise 08:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * No, that is one person's opinion on how Dr. Who episodes should be named. This is not a wikipedia policy. -- Dyslexic agnostic 08:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I wont edit soon because I want to avoid edit waring.--T-man, the wise. I've asked to the wikiproject TV episodes to define a guideline. Righ now, I don't want to edit here anymore, because if I work any version and the wikiproject chooses the other way my edits are going to be erased. 08:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * And I've written the following in reply on the wikiproject page:


 * I note that almost all "major" TV shows follow the title of the episode with the name of the show in parenthesis. See List of Prison Break episodes and List of Star Trek: Voyager episodes as two good examples. It is only in the Dr. Who episodes that there seems to be a lack of consensus. Despite the issue of disambiguation, the unique factor to consider is that all TV episodes should be treated alike, as some titles are more anbiguous than others and the use of the parenthesis will leave no doubt.


 * -- Dyslexic agnostic 08:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The WP policy is if using parenthesis only whe there is Disambiguation. But even if there is the most importan article still doesn't get parenthesis. There is no rule backing using the parenthesis indifferently for all the eps of a series (yet)--T-man, the wise 08:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC) I'll wait for the consensus there, then--T-man, the wise 08:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The same guideline applies to wikiproject TV episodes, so as soon as I find out how to eliminate redirects and move the articles with the unnecesary parenthesis, I or whoever wants to take the job will change it.--T-man, the wise 16:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Any doubts about my work check: Naming conventions (television)

Tables finished
I just finished filling the tables. In case you forgot it. Before me this page was a plane copy-paste of the episode synopsis you can find anywhere on internet...

It was I who design and did mos of this work:
 * 1) Redesign the tables
 * 2) Put all images (I also categorized each one), but on leather wings
 * 3) Added all the credits, airdate and episode number info.
 * 4) Created the format that will be used when the subarticles finally develope.
 * 5) Put all the annoying yapping you can read in this talk page :P

I basically took the page from this to THIS. --T-man, the wise 23:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Dyslexic Agnostic
Finally, some pilotfish editing I can take (I don't approve it, but it was kinda useful to me though) Only be careful with the drastic changes. The citation needed and the part you took off were uncalled for. I understand what led you to believe so, but you can ask me first when you don't undertand or doubt something. If you're going to keep your pilotfish work against advise (and my wishes) I'd appreciate if you could tone down comments like "significant". It's just typo correcting, very necesary but is not major working as writting. Same thing with the naming those were massive edits you were making and you were wrong all along. Please, be more careful in the future.--T-man, the wise 03:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Episode running time
With the opening and the credits sequence omitted, doesn't it seem like an episode runs more around close to 20-21 minutes, as opposed to just 18 minutes?

-- Marikina

I agree, I've been watching the episodes again and they are about 21 minutes long on average...

Aznfyrepixie 05:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Mistakes
There are a lot of mistakes in the air dates. Also the directors ana the writers of some episodes are mistaken. In our bulgarian list of episodes - http://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%8A%D0%BA_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%91%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD:_%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5_%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B8 I corrected the all, and the bg list of episodes is better than this. Correct the mistakes. To do so, you (all of you) must watch the beginning of every episode again, as I did, or just rewrite everithing from the bulgarian list. Batman tas

The Giant Coin
Is anybody watching the discussion page? I removed the statement for the penny it the episode list and in the article. In the episode "Almost Got'Im" the giant coins in the cave and in the bank are not the same. Just look at the size. From episodes "Off Ballance" and "Almost Got'Im" Batman tas

Summaries
The Summaries were coopied from worldsfinestonline.com so I removed them. Gman124 14:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It would have been a better Idea to: a) consult with the editors here first b) modify them or asking someonoe to do it for you. Several of these summaries didn't come from worldsfinestonline.com, they come directly from the warner bros. distribution. Therefore the best way to deal with these would have been using italic text and specifying "original summaries from Warner Bros.''--T-man, the wise 18:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Episode notability
Many or all of the existing individual episode pages for appear to fail the notability guidelines for television episodes, and have been tagged accordingly. These articles can be improved through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. Overly long plot summaries should be edited, to a maximum length of approximately ten words per minute of screen time. Trivia should be integrated into the body of the article, or removed if it is not directly relevant. Quotes and images should only be used as part of a critical analysis of the episode. You might also consider merging any notable information onto the "List of episodes" or season pages. Otherwise, when these pages come up for review in fourteen days, they may be redirected or merged. If you want any help or further information, then come to WikiProject Television/Episode coverage. Thanks. TTN 18:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If there are no objections, these will be redirected in a while. TTN 17:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * While some of them (On Leather Wings, Beware the Gray Ghost, and The Cat and the Claw for examples) probably could stand to have an article on there own, I agree that Wikipedia may not be the most appropriate place for full-page episode articles on this. However, World's Finest should not be merged with this page, as it is (production-wise) an episode of Superman: The Animated Series (I also think it should have enough real-world notability to stand on its own, being a near TV-movie like thing).--Tim Thomason 03:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll leave that one for now. If anyone actually feels like making an attempt to bring these up to standards, the redirects will always exist. Other than that, I guess I'll get started. TTN 22:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If 'Wikipedia', of all places, isn't an appropriate place for in-depth information on pop-culture, such as full-page episode articles of a popular cartoon, I don't know what is. ButteredToast 05:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Story continuity
I suggest completely wiping it out until it is re-written. I just read through it and it's a bunch of random, incoherent mumbling that makes little sense and is full of contradictions, personal opinions and unsourced statements. I honestly have no idea how it's survived this long. 75.153.231.20 22:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed! I hate that. Claycrow 16:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing of the chronology of the show written here matches what's reported above; i.e. the episode count of season 1 differs greatly from the list. Additionally, the introduction of Robin was done prior to "Robin's Reckoning", and I believe the show was retitled because Robin had become more integral to the show up to that point not because he was being introduced. It seems that a lot of supposition was done in trying to piece together elements of the show's continuity that the author is confused about. I question whether the author had good first hand knowledge of the show when this was written. Story continuity doesn't need to be very involved for this, I think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.236.194 (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Restoring sub articles for episodes
I cannot believe the individual episode pages were removed from Wikipedia. What was the point of doing that??? My friend and I used those pages as a reference point for a bi-weekly podcast that we do. Now we can't use them anymore, because, hey, some guy didn't like them. Good job. I'm sure Wikipedia is MUCH better off for not having those pages anymore. What an utter disgrace.

James IV 19:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)James IV

Instead of deleting the episode pages (which provided trivia, cast listings and more useful information), they should have been expanded. Removing them was a big mistake, and I request they change be undone.

The same goes for the Justice League, Batman Beyond and all DCAU episode pages. They should be full restored.

Destroda 19:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Seriously. If the list of episodes for an animated series is notable, than the descriptions of the episodes are notable. ButteredToast 02:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Some of the entries do need to be expanded. That I agree with. But deleting them was senseless. When / If I can find them time, I'll do my best to restore / expand the pages. Destroda 00:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Guidelines and policies are critically important and there is a clear guideline that lays out the consensus view on articles for individual TV episodes which can be found at WP:EPISODES. The contents of that guideline should be closely followed: individual episode articles need to establish out-of-universe notability, and plot summaries, goofs and trivia (also contained at WP:TRIVIA) are explicitly discouraged. If you can expand the individual articles in a way that satisfies the criteria laid out by the episode guideline, then by all means do so. However, if the focus of the article remains plot summaries, trivia and other such in-universe content, then the consensus view is clear and unequivocal that such articles should not exist and the content instead be included on the list-of-episodes page. Eusebeus 12:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * But the separate articles weren't replaced with plot summary content on the list-of-episodes page. They were replaced with nothing.  If, as you say, the guidelines say the content should be edited and moved, deleting the content entirely is clearly the wrong move and it's clearly going to upset people. ButteredToast 04:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

While I suppose that does make sense somewhat (Eusebeus), I aggree with top people. It is a huge disgrace, and whoever did that will be hated by me forever. I enjoied knowing whenever an episode (for example see no evil's ending) was originaly going to be different or whatever. Above all the titlecards should at least be on the page. But serously, no plot summeries. What the heck! I thought I liked what Wikapedia stood for, and I think I still will most of the time, but this is an outrage to a Batman fan like me!Claycrow 21:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

To Eusebeus, WP:TRIVIA clearly mentions that if the main problem with the old pages was having trivia sections, they should have been integrated in some way rather than completed gotten rid of. As it says "Poorly presented information is better than no information at all". Rather than all episode pages being removed, there could have been better discussions about how to modify the individual pages. Instead, some blowhard decided to remove ALL the pages - somehow, if the same format were uses in episodes of House, I doubt every episode would have been removed. Still, this is a cartoon - no-one wants to know any information about this Emmy-award winning series or anything... Slothian 00:35, 3 September 2007 (GMT)

Well all I know is that if this derection was taken for The Batman, or better yet, The Simpsons, everyone would have about two millon people on their "people who hate me" list. Claycrow 16:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Brief plot summaries can be provided within the context of the episode list. See List of That's So Raven episodes for just one example; others abound. The issue with the standalone articles is not that they contain trivia(although that is an issue). It is, rather, that they do not contain out-of-universe context or assertions of notability. Per the episode guideline purely in-universe content should be maintained on the list of episode pages. I suggest that the episode table be modified to contain a plotsummary field. As for some of the rather heated comments above, the episode guide should applied to all television series, from the Simpsons on down; there is a clear policy against inherited notability, and each episode article should be judged according to the same standard. Eusebeus 17:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd never logged into to wikipedia before, but I created an account just for this. The individual episode pages were great, and I want them back! What was the harm in having them?OCB 01:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Heart of Ice won a fucking Emmy. I'm fairly certain that qualifies as notable. Dlong 13:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It sure as hell does!Claycrow 01:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Why were the episodes pages for Batman and the other DCAU series removed? This series was notable for starting a cartoon universe which carried on for over 10 years. What other cartoon did that? These cartoons were great, and watchable for kids as well as adults. World's Finest Podcast does a great job of illustrating this point. Bring the episodes pages back, as someone obviously went to the trouble to creat them. I understand why people thought they were against the Wiki guidlines or whatever, but who gives someone the right to delete someone else's work? It was not porn, or obscene, so why just delete them instead of editing them into a more consice fashion (if space was the issue) or expanding them? Would you like it if I deleted the pages about your favorite TV show? Are you going to delete the episodes pages for shows like LOST or M.A.S.H. too? If you are going to enforce a rule, do it across the board. Bring the episode pages back for the DC Animated Universe, please. Knightwingbk 21:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC) knightwingbk

I just scrolled up to the top of this page and read this: " This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale." If that is your true intent, for an expansive, comprehensive, and detailed guide to a series, they why delete the episode pages? That is just hypocritical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightwingbk (talk • contribs) 21:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

-OK, so I went looking for the summaries for the episodes and they're gone? I see a lot of posting by many people who say they were great, and a lot of posting by people who say "they violated the rules!" Are you kidding me? I try not to throw out the reference too often since it *is* pretty cliched, but it was the Nazi's said ("I was just following orders?"), without thinking of the spirit of the law? The episode specific pages were well thought out, informative, and even though they weren't perfect, I haven't seen one person who says he/she didn't like the content? Also, I haven't seen a compelling argument for removing them. It's easy to quote the rules and delete them, can anybody take some sort of a stand and tell me *why*, when wikipedia favors consensus over credentials, these were removed? There are some posts in here where people seem to lose their cool, cursing and letting their frustration (passion?) come through. So, I'm asking Eusy or anybody else to explain, on this page, why destruction trumps construction on wikipedia?CoffeeLNU 01:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikipedia works by consensus: the consequence of often lengthy debates between people who bring various perspectives to the question. With respect to articles about fiction and specifically television episodes, Wikipedia has a set of guidelines and policies which are the result of that consensus-building exercise: WP:FICT and WP:EPISODE. If an individual episode can be brought up to the standard asserted in those guidelines, then it merits an article. Otherwise, consensus is clear: the article should be redirected. It must be stressed that consensus (and I urge editors to read the policy page) refers to site-wide practices, not the accumulation of opinion on a specific article or subject page. As a result, the recreation of the episode articles as they were written contravenes what, to date, has been determined the best practices for the online encyclopedia. Eusebeus 22:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

-This is an absolute tragedy. Not only did Heart of Ice win an Emmy, but it *had* a properly organized and referenced Wikipedia page. Shame on you Eusebeus, I can't believe you indiscriminately removed all episode pages and episode screenshots, without first verifying all contents... disgraceful. Your complaints about the pages not being accurate enough are laughable at best. How are we supposed to prove a counter-point on pages meeting wikipedia standards, when the pages are no longer viewable. Robin's Reckoning? Nominated for an Emmy, but not good enough to be mentioned on wikipedia? This is a tragedy. Nmerkner 18:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed Story Continuity
As mentioned in the far above discussion, I have removed this, due to it not sounding right. I have the whole thing on my computer if it needs to be replaced.Claycrow 01:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

A Merge Didn't Happen
When a merge occurs, some data must actually be transported from the merged articles to the main articles. TTN shouldn't be doing the mergers if he doesn't have the time to do the entire job. Notthegoatseguy 12:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

"Off Balance" episode
Batman asks, "Who's side are you on?" and Talia replies, "That would be telling." This is clearly a reference to the exact same lines repeatedly used in the opening of The Prisoner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.49.154 (talk) 08:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


 * So? 71.193.243.8 (talk) 01:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was move to List of Batman animated episodes. JPG-GR (talk) 03:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Why does this article get to be "List of Batman episodes", when a) the show's original title was "Batman: The Animated Series"; b) episodes from several, differently-titled shows are included here; and c) the only TV show entitled simply "Batman" is the 1966 Adam West vehicle? Surely a more apt name for this article would be "List of Batman animated episodes", both to cover all the various titles it had and to differentiate it from the article about the 1966 episodes?  I'll grant you that that article has a very odd name, too (Batman (TV): Guest appearances and episodes).  It should be split into two articles, one for episodes and one for guest stars.  But there's no question but that the title for this article is problematic on several fronts.

Another possibility is just to move this article back to List of Batman: The Animated Series episodes and snip the redirect to List of Batman episodes, allowing the 1966 list to take over this page.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  08:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support move to List of Batman: The Animated Series episodes, which matches its main article. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment In its current form, List of Batman: The Animated Series episodes isn't an accurate name of the article. My question is - why are all these series combined into one list? JPG-GR (talk) 16:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Demon Within
I changed the summary of the episode "The Demon Within". The previous entry barely resembled the plot in the slightest.67.172.168.183 (talk) 02:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Villains
I've been writing what villain is featured in each episode. I could use some help to complete everything though 85.228.189.67 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I added the villains and cleaned up what you added, it looked pretty messy. The Scare crow  . ' . ' .  08:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Some banal drone removed this useful and helpful section. Please revert, someone. thank you. 50.67.52.235 (talk) 07:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Continuity
Why are the Static Shock crossovers listed so high o nthe lsit. I thought that they'd be towards the end after The New Batman Adventures. I've always assumed that Teen Titans was part of this continuity, an episode of Static states that Robin is "with the Titans", and that Robin joined the Titan's after Joker died and Batman forbade him to be Robin (necessitating it for him to go on his own). I know this is OR, but this order of this list (to an extent) seems to be so too. Emperor001 (talk) 18:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Airdates and Chronology
Why are the episodes not listed in order of airdate? The article doesn't seem to explain why the numbering is not consistent with the airdates, but at a glance, the airdates have a better chronology order, given that POV (which is listed as episode #7) involves the Ventriloquist, who was introduced in Read My Lips, which is listed as #64. I also find it bizarre that this issue deosn't appear to have been raised in this talk page.--Macca7174talk 12:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "POV" doesn't involve The Ventriloquist at all. Just FYI. And, even if it did, going by "airdate" still places "POV" in front of "Read My Lips". Lastly, going by airdate doesn't make any logical sense. Breaking it down by Production Date does mainly because of the overall story chronology. You can't start with "The Cat and the Claw, Part 1", then wait ten episodes for the conclusion. I never understood that order. 76.102.129.73 (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Big problems here regarding the ordering of the episodes
There are great problems with this list. First, as Macca7174 said, there is no explanation as to why they are not in chronological order of original airings, which is what we both would recommend. Second, the second season's intro states, "The first episodes produced were shuffled with the remaining unaired episodes of the first season and aired daily." The airdates given here utterly fail to support this, as does a detailed first-season episode guide in a issue of Cinefantastique magazine that I happen to possess, and will dig out as soon as feasible. No first season episodes were left "unaired" until the second began, which was entirely on a weekly basis (Saturday mornings, to be exact), the first time through. The magazine also gives each episode's production number, and I'll check and see if that order matches what we have here. After the move to the WB, we find another problem, the two-season breakdown. After a gap of several months between Season Three's eighth and ninth episodes (with only a tenth around the same time as the latter to finish the season), Season Four begins just three days later! Absurd; surely the season break, if this run was indeed in two separate seasons, would be between #s 8 and 9. Furthermore, while again the given original airdates don't match the listed order, this does actually seem to be the original airing order. They did indeed open with "Holiday Knights," which presented the viewer with Tim Drake as a new Robin, Dick Grayson as Nightwing, and Batgirl aware of the others' real identities, all with no explanation, which did eventually come, albeit piecemeal. "Sins of the Fathers" presented Tim's origin, while much later "Old Wounds" explained the changes with Dick and Barbara, although in flashback, which nevertheless was clearly not the producers' intent (the much later initial telecast, I mean), given the earlier episodes' simply depicting things these new ways. I therefore must call the credibility of the given airdates into question. Stuck in that magazine issue I have notes taken off the Warner Animation website for Seasons Two and up, including their name for the WB's run (I'm not sure the title that's here matches that, but I'm not sure it doesn't either). The fact of the matter is that those episodes have, to my knowledge, never been televised (in the US, at least) under any series title but The Superman Batman Hour (or whatever exactly it was), which is definitely how they were premiered. That certainly should be reflected in the article. Like I said, big problems here. --Ted Watson (talk) 23:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've got that issue of Cinefantastique (Vol. 24, #6/Vol. 25, #1, [big double issue], February 1994). Further problems here. According to their production numbers, "Feat of Clay" (#s 20 & 21) and "Heart of Steel" (#s 37 & 38) are the only first season two-parters whose two parts are numbered consecutively. There is also further evidence that the production numbers for the WB run are bogus. Story editor Michael Reeves: "'The only people we had [emphasis his] to listen to was Broadcast Standards and Practices and their only flat out taboo was that we couldn't kill anybody, and we even got around that a couple of times. In this episode [season one's "Mudslide"] Clayface went off the cliff and melted. He's dead.'" (p. 110, column 1) The WB episode numbered 8 contains the shocking revelation that (and explanation how) Clayface survived those events, but there he is in their supposed #1, "Holiday Knights," whose other internal continuity problems have been spelled out previously. It just can't have been the first one they made then. Oh, and despite my earlier statement, I don't have the Warner Animation website's name for the WB run, so I won't dispute the one given here. I am going to rewrite the Second Season intro, however. --Ted Watson (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've compared the original airdates in this article to those in the Cinefantastique episode guide and found some disagreements. Let me point out in no uncertain terms that this issue was published in late 1993, between the first two seasons, and is littered with direct quotes from various producers, story editors, etc., who worked on the show. The magazine's people clearly had access to direct, first-hand accounts and records of these then-recent events.


 * "Mad as a Hatter"&mdash;here: April 29, 1993, there: October 12, 1992 (note that "Perchance to Dream" dated to October 19, 1992, is a direct sequel to this, the Hatter taking his revenge for his defeat by Batman in "Mad...", and therefore must follow it).
 * "Dreams in Darkness"&mdash;here: September 20, 1993, there: November 3, 1992.
 * "The Cape & Cowl Conspiracy" (ampersand theirs, while here we have "and"; anybody know how it actually appears on screen?)&mdash;here: April 30, 1993, there: October 14, 1992.
 * "Night of the Ninja"&mdash;here: June 2, 1993, there: October 26, 1992 (again, note that "Day of the Samurai" dated February 23, 1993, is a sequel to this episode).
 * "Off Balance"&mdash;here, November 21, 1992, there: November 23, 1992 (admittedly, a mere two days difference, but given the others, and the nature of the source.... In the commentary for this episode, producer Bruce Timm says that three different versions of this one aired; the overseas studio had trouble with the disorienting vertigo effects, and just to get it on the air, "we" improvised something with video/computer technology; the next time on, the studio's work was shown, then on the third airing, a combination of the two effects was seen, which is what's been in release ever since. I can get specific in page number, etc., if anybody thinks this is notable enough for inclusion).
 * "The Strange Secret of Bruce Wayne"—here: June 3, 1993, there: October 29, 1992.
 * As two of these are essentially mandated by internal evidence, and the source is practically if not literally first-hand, these dates have much more credibility than the ones currently in the article, and call the spring 1994 airdates for five second season episodes severely into question, given the objections that the series title "change" (not effective until that September) and tone shift are part and parcel of that season. Indeed, some of these other sources combine the five aired in September '93 and the five allegedly aired in May '94 as the second season, those that aired the following fall as a third season, and five actually second-season episodes that allegedly weren't seen until a week in September 1995 as a fourth season! The questionable dates aside, these season breakdowns prove that they know little about this series, and certainly weren't working from any kind of official records. Sorry, but I have to disregard those May 1994 and WB-run dates. --Ted Watson (talk) 21:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

With regards to the ordering, I think whoever did this based the ordering off of the way they are listed in the DVD's. I just bought them (though only volumes 3 and 4 have arrived), but it looks like the ordering here is consistent with the ordering on the DVDs. Sorry if someone else already said this, if he/she did, I did not see it. Emperor001 (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * If I did not make this clear, I apologize. With the exception of those two-parters, the list here is in production number order, as they are given in the Cinefantastique issue, and production numbers are claimed here. If somebody did list them simply as they appear on the DVDs, that doesn't justify attaching production numbers to the listings, and yet they are so close. Obviously, the two-parters would be put together there. Are there such numbers, explicitly indicated to be production numbers, on the discs, whether on the packaging or the on-screen menu?
 * Note that in the list of differing original airdates I've changed the one of "Off Balance" per the magazine from "October 21" to "October 23." This is what they actually give there; sorry. I've also clarified the "ampersand/and" question for "...Conspiracy" in that list.
 * I also see that I did not make it clear that I was not totally dismissing the claim that five second season episodes did not show up until fall 1995. Combined with the claim that five others premiered in advance, that leaves a mere ten (just half the package!) to have actually debuted in the 1994-95 season itself. Not at all likely. If I wasn't 35 miles away from the nearest town large enough to have a Wal-Mart store, let alone a sizable public library, I am certain I could find media reports indicating the new, second season to have started in September 1994, with no mention of May. Can someone else try? --Ted Watson (talk) 20:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I just made a couple of changes to the article that play off the last paragraph above (my signature is different now because another editor complained that my having one name on talk posts and another in edit logs—I was led into that situation by the nature of the sign-up mechanism—would suggest that I was trying to hide something, which I'm not). I added a note to the intro to the second season list acknowledging (for me, admitting) that five episodes were indeed held back until September 1995, and I want to make sure no one interprets that as my conceding to more than I intend. I have not found any corroboration of this but, on reflection, decided that as the producers and/or network did that very thing the first season, it is highly plausible that they did it again here. As I said above, that works very strongly against the claim of May 1994 premieres for five other second season episodes, since it leaves only ten segments to premiere in the fall of 1994 itself. As there was no publicity of new episodes that spring, nor any indication anywhere of the title change actually occurring prior to that autumn, and there is the significantly different tone found in the second season episodes, it is just impossible for me to believe that these five episodes were aired early. Despite the fact that May is an important "sweeps" period in the Nielsen ratings system, FOX would still have been throwing these episodes away, because nobody in the general audience would have been aware that there was anything but reruns turning up on this program at that time. So my acceptance of the five September 1995 premieres strengthens my disbelief in the May 1994 ones. I strongly hope that someone can access FOX Network and/or Warner Animation records (or find some publication that did for the second season what that Cinefantastique issue did for the first) and settle this once and for all.


 * For the record, on this occasion I've also corrected a typo misspelling of "practically" in one of my previous posts here, and added emphasis to one word in the most recent one, relevant to the two-parters in the DVD sets. Just to be completely open about my actions. --Tbrittreid (talk) 19:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've done a bit more modifying of my list of first-season episodes and their disputed original airdates. Sorry for my mistakes in copying the dates, and I should have bulleted it at the outset for clarity. Very sorry. I've also decided to change the ones that someone else hasn't already changed (off that first-season list, I mean). --Tbrittreid (talk) 20:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * While keeping the above promise, I found one more episode with a different date here from the one given in Cinefantastique, which I have both added to the list above and corrected in the article. --Tbrittreid (talk) 20:26, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I finally begin watching the episodes on HBO Max in 2021. The ordering there is definitely the original air dates as seen on TV Time. While I think the production dates might make sense in terms of developing the characters/plot, I can't verify it yet and don't have time. The two parters definitely should be viewed together instead of several episodes apart. However, for the purpose of wikipedia, I think we should stick with the latest/oldest ordering instead of that of some DVDs in the old days. While there are some who might still watch DVD, they shouldn't dictate the rest of the population. If my view point isn't a good summary of the above, I apologize. This list needs to be revamped by the experts. Supermann (talk) 03:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Philip Morwood?
"The Lion And The Unicorn" is credited to "Diane Duane, Philip Morwood and Steve Perry". It has been suggested that "Philip Morwood" was a misattribution of Duane's husband and frequent writing partner Peter Morwood. This seems likely to me, but I'd be interested if anyone could confirm it. Daibhid C (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Season 2 title card
"These episodes and the last nine of the first season were released in the correct production order as part of the Batman: The Animated Series Volume Three DVD boxset. Select episodes of the second season on the DVD boxset feature the first season's opening theme, mainly the ones that don't feature Robin"

Not sure I understand, but is this only for the DVD release? Were all episodes for season 2 originally broadcast with the Batman and Robin title card (not specifically the one shown on the DVD release)?

Similarly, how were The New Batman Adventures originally telecast? The DVD offers the option of displaying the Batman / Superman Adventures titles, which I understand to be a rerun of previously aired episodes or the original "Batman" no titlecard openning. I find this rather confusing overall. --RedKnight (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "Were all episodes for season 2 originally broadcast with the Batman and Robin title card" No. The five episodes that aired in May 1994 had the first season intro. The WB aired The New Batman Adventures with the Batman / Superman Adventures titles. --Meadyforzbs (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Preferred viewing order
"Due to character introductions and pacing, the original air dates are generally considered the preferred viewing order for the series.[1]"

Has anyone looked at the citation for this assertion? Not only does it come from an internet forum and not a reliable source, but the source given doesn't even support the assertion. Whoever put this line in had a problem with reading comprehension. The first post in the forum discussion is asking what the preferred viewing order for Batman is, and says while he knows the the airing order is *usually* the preferred viewing order (for shows in general) he knows this isn't always the case. That seems to be the entire basis for the citation, as the responses to his question all indicate the production order is the preferred order. 24.214.53.75 (talk) 01:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Episode titles
What are the canonical sources for the episode titles? I'm rewatching and noticed that the title-card titles for episodes 10 and 11 are "Two-Face" (no part number) and "Two-Face: Part II" (with roman numerals). The DVD liner notes have the versions we have in this list, "Two-Face: Part 1" and "Two-Face: Part 2" (with a part number for the first episode and a normal two). Do we treat the DVD liner as being canonical over the episodes as their aired? Or should we adjust to match the title cards? JRP (talk) 18:32, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I've noticed the same issue. Personally, I feel the title as displayed within the video (the title card) would/should be the primary one - line notes and other printed media being secondary. However, I really don't know what policy (if any) exists on this, so I haven't made any edit along these lines. Still - if individual pages should be created for episodes, it seems logical the infoboxes would include the title cards where possible. That might lend more weight behind using the title card information. I have made a few minor edits on titles of other shows - again based on the title card displayed within the video, rather than liner notes and/or other published media. Thus far I haven't heard of any problems with those edits. --Ballpark frank (talk) 01:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Splitting
The New Batman Adventures is considered a separate series from Batman: The Animated Series. It started airing two years after the original series and features a different animation style. While they may be in the same continuity, it is evident that they are not the same series. I propose that the episodes of The New Batman Adventures be moved to its own page. GamingBuddha (talk) 00:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose, Look at the DVD collection, they may not be under the same title, but they are considered to be the same series. They share the same continuity and are consecutive. The voices and writers are the same. This article is written in such a way that there seems to be no disconnect. I say keep it as it is. Pjposullivan (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

"Last aired" date
How is that the last airing date for season 2 is given as May 3, 1998; but in the Episode List, the latest date I see is Sept 15, 1995.

I think it's a mistake. Exodusno1 (talk) 21:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I fixed this the other day. Looks like someone used the wrong format for the date or something so it was all screwed up. —Jeferman (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Mistake in Season Two description
There is a mistake in this Wikipedia article. The last line of the introductory paragraph to Season Two (1994–1995) says "The entire second season was released on DVD as part of the Batman: The Animated Series Volume Four set." This is false. The episodes described after are all on the Volume Three DVD set, not the Fourth. I have it in front of me... They are numbered episodes 10 (Sideshow) to 29 (Batgirl Returns) in the set. I'm new to Wikipedia can someone please double check this and change it thanks. Caszper (talk) 00:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC) Caszper

This list should be changed
The episodes should be listed in order of Air Date, sectioned into respective Seasons aired, with Production Date information included as entirely secondary. This is an obvious, normal way to present the information, and it's what everyone expects when they look up the list, so that they can then find and watch the episode they'd like, as it is in the actual collection of episodes aired.

Wikipedia is currently wrong and other sources have it right.
 * IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103359/episodes?season=1
 * Fandom: https://batmantheanimatedseries.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Batman:_The_Animated_Series_Episodes

Please someone fix this.

— sloth_monkey 23:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)