Talk:Superhero/Archive 4

Wow....just wow
"Superheroes originated in the U.S. and most internationally popular superheroes are American creations" That is the worst sentence I've seen in my life. Oh really? Were they?Jeff503 23:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


 * To add to that, Superman, undoubtably the most famous superhero (at least in the English speaking world) was created in Canada.--70.24.140.170 (talk) 17:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, wasn't he created in Cleveland, Joe Shuster moved there FROM Canada, but Siegel and Shuster created Superman while living in Cleveland Ohio.129.139.1.68 (talk) 16:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Correct. Siegel, an American, conceived the Superman character and together with Shuster the artist (who emigrated to Cleveland from Canada) fleshed out the concept. Chasrob (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Who Wants to be a Superhero
Just curious; is this show notable enough to be included in the "Superheroes in Other Media" section? I only bring it up because some instances (such as the videogame one), are relatively short except for discussions on how the games focus on original characters, instead of using existing franchises. 72.88.218.162 (talk) 00:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

(any body, everybody ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.150.110 (talk) 18:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Tarzan
Tarzan was introduced in 1912. He has many of the same qualities as Superman.


 * 1) Super-human abilities. Stronger than any other man, stronger than apes and lions, able to fly through forests, super-human senses such as smell and hearing.
 * 2) Hidden identity. In the original novel, Tarzan's true identity as an English Lord is kept secret from everyone, even when Tarzan himself knows it.
 * 3) Protector of the weak. Tarzan is constantly showing up whenever anyone is in danger and saving them, usually "flying" through the tree tops. Saving them from animals, forest fires, pirates, etc..
 * 4) Love infatuation but unconsummated. Just like Superman, Tarzan is infatuated with a female, but he can never obtain her, yet is always trying to impress her.

Tarzan is the original superhero, 20 years before Superman. By the time of Superman, Tarzan was already one of the most popular figures of his age for an entire generation. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Diversity?
Well in heroes of colour section it talks of african superheroes, has there been any australian aboriginal heroes, and I know there are some indian(as in india indians) superheroes but none seem to be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.108.238 (talk) 00:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * This is an excellent point. I believe Tarzan was the original proto superhero from which Superman was modeled (see below). The original Tarzan novel (1912) is racist with black stereotypes and white race as seen as superior. Which made me think the whole superhero enterprise has its roots in racism - which may explain why there are few black superheroes. Superheroes like Tarzan were invented when colonialism was falling apart, the western frontier was closed, slavery was over - many whites were insecure about their position, and superheroes gave a sense of superiority. Just a theory I don't know, I'm sure there are academic studies on this. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

How to become a Superhero
Section moved to talk: as written is unencyclopedic and unreferenced RJFJR (talk) 15:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Superheroes are usually super humans that we see in comics, T.V. shows and other places, but there are some real life men who have actually taken up to become one. Although, to be a successful one, it requires to have super powers or have a sixth sense.etc. But since such humans are found one in a million who actually have special abilities, it is not possible for a normal human to become a super hero. So, for a normal human to become a super hero, it includes sharpening the 5 senses. Well, it obviously includes getting a costume. Also, additional things may include acquiring more strength, changing identity, learning martial arts.etc. Also, the person should have lesser fear of things like heights. Becoming a super hero is not the easiest task. It takes a lot of time and devotion.

Superheroes of color
I suggest that the section on non-white superheroes be renamed precisely that. "Of color" is not good English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 08:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "People of color" is a commonly used phrase (see the article for more information). Achowat (talk) 12:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Categories of Superheroes - Original Research
The entire section on the Categories of Superheroes needs to be gutted. It's an entirely unreferenced morass of fan-made terms and a constant battleground for adding and removing people's favorite examples. Add to the fact that it is a completely devoid of encyclopedic merit, per WP:AMNESIA, and you're left with a section that we'd be better without than with. Absent a compelling reason to keep, I suggest complete removal of the section. Achowat (talk) 15:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I moved the section below for discussion (and hopefully referencing). - jc37 18:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Categories of superheroes
Individual superheroes can be categorized by archetypes, based upon their power set. Many heroes fit into more than one category. Examples of superhero archetype categories include the following.
 * Acrobat: A hero whose main ability is great control over his/her body, granting above average strength, stamina and reflexes. Usually depicted as medium-size to small frame persons, they can be either humans with extensive training (Robin, Daredevil, Super Mario) or superpowered beings (Spider-Man, The Creeper, Nightcrawler).
 * Aerial: A character whose main skill is flight, either by his/her own means (Angel, Hawkman, Zauriel) or because he/she is a very capable pilot (Blackhawk, Enemy Ace).
 * Armored Hero: A gadgeteer without personal superpowers, using powers generated from a suit of powered armor; e.g., Iron Man, S.T.R.I.P.E., and Steel.
 * Behemoth/Goliath: A character possessing massive superstrength and near-indestructibility and, for males, usually an oversized muscular body. One of the most powerful of the superhero archetypes; e.g., The Hulk, Lobo, He-Man, The Thing and Colossus.
 * Blaster: A hero whose main power is a distance attack, usually an "energy blast", this is the most common of the superhero archetypes; e.g., Black Lightning, Cyclops, Human Torch, Invisible Woman, Starfire, Static, The Ray.
 * Chosen: A hero who usually gains powers from wielding magical or sci-fi items, such as swords (King Arthur, He-man, Lion-O, Black Knight, Shining Knight), wands (Sailor Moon), rings (Green Lantern), wrist bands (Captain Marvel (Marvel Comics)) or other items generally worn on the chest (Power Rangers), arm region (Ben 10), or neck (Card Captors). This category also includes the hero who is bestowed with powers from some sort of enchantment (Captain Marvel (DC Comics), Buffy Summers) or by human enhancement (Captain America).
 * Demon: A hero with demonic powers who fights against other demonic characters (Blade, Ghost Rider, Spawn, Werewolf by Night) or being a demon his/herself willing to protect humanity (Etrigan, Hellboy, Hellstorm).
 * Divine: A hero which powers were granted by a deity (Deadman, Phantom Stranger, The Crow, The Spectre, Wonder Woman, Zauriel) or for being a deity his/herself (Ares, Highfather, Hercules, Thor).
 * Energizer: A blaster who possesses the ability to generate a vast amount of energy (Ki, Chakra, etc.). Mostly associated with anime and manga heroes (Son Goku, Pegasus Seiya, Naruto Uzumaki, Yusuke Urameshi, etc.), they can summon vast reserves of energy during combat, growing in power as they train or when pushed to their limits. Some have even been known to "Henshin" into wilder versions of themselves (Super Saiyan, Nine-Tailed Forms, etc.). This category can also extend to characters who have the ability to absorb, hold, or redirect energy as well as discharge it, absorb the properties of matter, or absorb DNA to gain a being's powers (Amazing Man, Bishop, Gambit, Kevin Levin, Rogue).
 * Elementalist: A hero who controls some natural element or part of the natural world; e.g., Storm (weather), Magneto (magnetism), Phoenix (cosmic fire; life & death), Swamp Thing (vegetation), Human Torch and Green Flame (fire), Iceman and Ice (ice), Red Tornado (wind) or Animal Man and Vixen (animal kingdom avatars).
 * Feral: A hero linked somehow to the animal kingdom, granting him/her animalistic abilities and strengths either by power summoning (Animal Man, Vixen), having animal traits granting them bestial abilities (Wolverine, Dr. Hank McCoy, Sabretooth), shapeshifting (Beast Boy, Congo Bill, Timber Wolf) or being normal humans with empathic control over beasts (Tarzan, Rima the Jungle Girl, B'wana Beast).
 * Gadgeteer: A hero who invents or wields special equipment that often imitates superpowers, but has no personal super powers; e.g., Nite Owl, Tarantula, Blue Beetle, Green Lantern, and Catwoman.
 * Ghost: A hero with ghost-like abilities: either invisibility (such as Invisible Woman and Red Tornado); intangibility (such as Shadowcat and The Vision); or both (such as Deadman, Ghost, Martian Manhunter and The Spectre).
 * Healer: A hero who is able to quickly recover from serious injury; e.g., Lobo, The Crow, The Doctor, Wolverine. This may also be a hero whose primary ability is to heal others; e.g., Angel, Elixir, She-Ra.
 * Magician: A hero who is trained in the use of magic, another one of the most powerful of the superhero archetypes; e.g., Doctor Fate, Doctor Strange, Scarlet Witch, Zatanna.
 * Mariner: A hero related to the seas, usually depicted as stronger and more resilent than human beings (Aquaman, Namor, Popeye) or normal humans with skill and experience underwater (Sea Devils) and as seamen (Lance O'Casey).
 * Marksman: A hero who uses projectile weapons, typically guns, bows and arrows, boomerangs or throwing blades; e.g., Crimson Avenger, Green Arrow, Hawkeye, Jon Sable, Jonah Hex and Vigilante.
 * Martial Artist: A hero whose physical abilities are mostly human, rather than superhuman, but whose hand-to-hand combat skills are phenomenal. Some of these characters are actually superhuman (Iron Fist, Luke Cage), while others are human beings who are extremely skilled and athletic (Bronze Tiger, Richard Dragon, The Question, Shang Chi, Rick Flag, Wildcat).
 * Matter Manipulator: A hero with the power to alter the molecular structure of matter (Captain Atom, Doctor Manhattan, Firestorm and Silver Surfer).
 * Mechanical Hero: A hero related to technology, this category includes cyborgs (RoboCop, Vic Stone), remote controlled robots (Box, Bozo the Iron Man) but mostly automatons with advanced AI (Autobots, the original Human Torch, Infiltration Unit Zeta, Metal Men, Red Tornado, The Vision).
 * Mecha/Robot Pilot: A hero who controls a giant robot, a subtype common in Japanese superhero and science fiction media (Gundam, Robotech, Mazinger Z) as well as American versions e.g., Megas XLR, Big Guy.
 * Mentalist: A hero who possesses psionic abilities, such as telekinesis, telepathy and extra-sensory perception; e.g., Professor X, Emma Frost, Phoenix, Kelly Bailey, Martian Manhunter, Raven and Zatanna.
 * Metal Hero: A mainly space and police-based superhero who typically takes the form of an android, cyborg, or a human who dons a "metallic" suit. Henceforth, most of the Metal Heroes are also referred to as "Henshin (transforming) Heroes". They usually feature futurist or space age technology, vehicles, or weapons to fight monsters, high-tech gangs, extra-dimensional despots, or galactic crime barons. Examples include the Space Sheriffs (Shaider, Sharivan, and Gavan), Beetle Fighters (Juukou B-Fighter and B-Fighter Kabuto), and Special Rescue Teams (Exceedraft, Winspector, and Solbrain).
 * Militarized Warrior: Technically a combination between a martial artist and a marksman or a gadgeteer, either working within the armed forces (Captain America, Col. Nick Fury, James Bond, Sgt. Rock) or as a freelance (Batman, The Punisher, Wild Dog).
 * Paragon: A hero who possesses the basic powers of super-strength, flight and invulnerability. They are considered to be the most powerful of the superhero archetypes. Consisting of such heroes as the extraterrestrial Superman and Gladiator, the god Thor, the magically fueled Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman, or the solar/photokinetic Sentry.
 * Possessed: A hero who harbors an entity internally, which may be related to the divine or the demon archetypes; e.g., Etrigan, Ghost Rider, The Crow, The Spectre.
 * Reality Changer: Often a comedic hero whose set of powers include cartoon-like alterations of reality itself in his/her behalf (Big Head, Freakazoid!).
 * Rider: A hero who rides a powerful vehicle, e.g. Lobo, Ghost Rider or the Silver Surfer; or rides a unique creature, like Black Knight or Shining Knight.
 * Shapeshifter: A hero who can manipulate his/her own body to suit his/her needs, such as stretching (Plastic Man, Mister Fantastic, Elongated Man), or disguise (Changeling/Morph, Mystique). Other such shapeshifters can transform into animals (Beast Boy), alien creatures (Ben 10), inorganic materials (Metamorpho) or all of these things (Martian Manhunter).
 * Screamer: A blaster whose power is contained in the vocal chords (Banshee, Black Canary).
 * Size Changer: A shapeshifter who can alter his/her size; e.g., the Atom and The Wasp (shrinking only), Colossal Boy and Atom Smasher (growth only), Hank Pym (both).
 * Slasher: A hero whose main power is some form of hand-to-hand cutting weapon—either devices, such as knives or swords, (Deadpool, Elektra, Blade, Link) or natural, such as claws or fangs (Wolverine, Timber Wolf, Werewolf by Night).
 * Speedster: A hero possessing superhuman speed and reflexes; e.g., The Flash, Quicksilver, Sonic.
 * Super Genius/Master Mind: A hero possessing superhuman/superior intelligence or intellect; e.g., Professor X, Super Commando Dhruva, Weasel, Forge, Brainiac 5, Dr. Hank McCoy, Mister Fantastic, the teenager Toyman, The Doctor.
 * Sleuth: Technically a type of Super Genius, but mainly someone who relies more on keen observation skills and deductive reasoning, often depicted as a very capable two-fisted fighter; e.g., Sherlock Holmes, The Question, Human Target, Elongated Man, Green Hornet, Rorschach, Van Helsing.
 * Teleporter: A hero who is able to teleport from point A to point B. Some teleport due to their own body chemistry (such as Nightcrawler), others teleport via telekinetic energy (such as Mysterio II).
 * Time Traveller: A hero with the ability to manipulate time itself. This category includes standard time traveler (Waverider, and Curtis Donovan), characters who manipulate the flow of time so as to either slow time down or to speed it up (Tempo and Hiro Nakamura), and characters (Phoenix and The Doctor) who travel through space as well as time.

Comment
Commentary on the articles of superheroes...

All articles about superheroes mention the creators as writer and artist, but also happens that the writer is an artist ...

The correct is: writer and illustrator, writer and cartoonist and writer and illustrator ...

It is enough to say that discrimination is a writer not an artist, I'm a writer and I am whole and complete issue of being called an artist, are knowing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.177.247.58 (talk) 12:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Multiple issues
Someone snuck the "multiple issues" box off the article sometime back without the issues being addressed, which goes against policy/guidelines. I've restored it. This article is a non-encyclopedic embarrassment of original-research claims, bad writing, POV fancruft and other problems. It will take a great deal of work to fix, and one can already see, by fans' continuing insertions of his or her favorite characters in the strings of examples, that treating this topic with encyclopedically and with a real-world literary and sociological perspective rather than as a fan site is going to be an uphill battle. Here's a tip: If it doesn't read like a textbook or what the Encyclopedia Britannica would write, then it's a fan site and not a real encyclopedia article. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Obama?
Not to be anti-Obama or anything, but should he really be used as an example of a superhero? There are two pictures of him on the wiki page, I don't know if its a troll or something, but its just really awkward.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.184.128 (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I only found the one picture and you're right: This was a piece of art using superhero motifs but it did not illustrate a recognized, published "superhero of color" like the Falcon, the Black Panther, Luke Cage, the John Stewart Green Lantern, etc. In that respect it was a misleading image.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Groups/League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
In the section about superhero groups, two types are mentioned: Groups that have a common origin, and all-star groups. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is given as an example of the first type. I suppose the implication is that they have their origin in extant literature set in the 1800s. However, within their universe, they most certainly fit the definition of an all-star group, being pulled from all walks of life, with no commonality in their origins or power sources. Granted, I've only seen the movie and read just a couple of the comics, but from that meager information pool, they certainly seem a disparate group. Question is, is their meta-commonality (i.e. all characters from existing literature) enough to qualify them as a common-origin group? I mean, if that's the case, DC superheroes could all be considered a common-origin group because they all appear in DC comics. And even the method of selection for the League is, basically, a guy picking the best of what's out there in-universe. Certainly sounds all-star to me. Applejuicefool (talk) 11:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Edited, though I noticed that part of the definition of common-origin groups is that they usually work together, while all-star groups may also work individually. Perhaps that was part of the decision-making process that landed the League in common-origin, but we also have quite a few works of literature - not to mention some members' recruitment vignette for the League - featuring them "working individually". I think all-star still fits better. Other thoughts? Applejuicefool (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Brother Muscle, Ultraperson, Roberto Aguilera
When reading this article I noticed several references to superheroes I'd never heard of before - Brother Muscle, Ultraperson, Roberto Aguilera, and B.A.D.G.E.

After some research, it seems that all those feature in a very, very short-lived, highly obscure, independent comic only released a few months ago. There are several dozen references to these characters and their creators, more even than established comics creators such as Stan Lee and Jack Kirby.

In the interest of NPOV guidelines, I am removing all references to these characters 70.112.224.236 (talk) 20:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I concur. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Ultimate Spider-Man II
I would like to propose that Miles Morales, the new Spider-Man from the Ultimate Universe, to be included in "Superheroes of color". I think it is relevant because a latino/african Spider-Man has caused controversy and reignited the debate about retractation of racial diversity in comics — Preceding unsigned comment added by HValle (talk • contribs) 13:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Characters from Japan

 * It appears to me that there are some very ambiguous classification regarding Japanese animation and live action characters. For example, this article said Goku from Dragon Ball is the equivalent of Superman in Japan. But as far as I know not many Japanese and Asians consider Dragon Ball a superhero comic and characters from it as superheroes.
 * How does this fit to the description of Superhero above sounds ambiguous to me. There are quite a lot of Japanese anime characters who display supernatural and super like power, but are no consider one both in the fictional world or in the audience perspective.
 * The same problem can be found on other pages, such as the list of superheros, I saw that some BLEACH characters are included, and I think most people who read the comic agree that BLEACH is not consider superhero comic right?
 * Also, although Super Sentai and Kamen Rider franchise are market as Super Heroes are largely accurate, it is ambiguous on how Magic Girl genera are link with the idea of Superheros here. People who are familiar with Magic Girl genera knew that some of the early work within the genera had nothing to do with criminal fighting etc. Also, there are Magic Girl shows that are present characters in less then "super" ways, similar to how Harry Potter is not consider a superhero.
 * In that perspective, we can also argue that Naruto and BLEACH characters aren't super hero, as in the fictional world the stories revolve around, Ninja and Soul Reaper are more akin to Heroes in fantasy novel then superheros.


 * I hope this don't offend anyone, as I am not familiar with Wikipedia policy yet.

Marlon unknown (talk) 02:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Dragon Ball is more related to the mythological than super-hero side. The Saiyans though explained in the series as a race of extraterrestrials clearly have ties to the Monkey King of Chinese mythology. This appears more clear in the earliest versions of the Dragon Ball series. And, as you have noted, there is a difference between being super-powered and a super-hero.
 * I do not consider the Super Sentai to be super-heroes. Possibly a super-hero group, but they had distinctly different characteristics that hold them apart from the tradition of an American super-hero character. Super Sentai are specifically a "group" (usually composed of 5 (five) members; hence the "go" in some Sentai titles) and have access to "giant robots" aka mecha. They do not function independently and all their powers are uniform - they each have what others have though it may be related to a different element or elemental characteristic.
 * The Kamen Rider, Kikaider, Metalder, etc. are often billed as being cyborgs but are sometimes actually being robots. This one really is on a fine line for me. There are cyborg super-heroes in American Comics (most notably off-the-top-of-my-head) Cyborg of the Teen Titans and Robotman of the All-Star Squadron. I personally do not consider Marvel Comics character Deathlok to be a super-hero).
 * Harry Potter is most definitely not a super-hero. As far as Magic Girl genre goes, I would think that Sailor Moon is closer to a super-hero series than what appears to be the traditional Magic girl genre. In reference to this, I don't consider the DC Comics characters the Phantom Stranger or Swamp Thing to be a super-heroes.
 * I definitely agree with you that not all manga or anime characters are super-heroes. I do not consider Saint Seiya to be a super-hero series even though the characters in the manga and related anime series have "costumes" (armor aka "cloth") that they were when they are transformed into their empowered forms.WereTech (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

non hetero-sexual chars in watchmen
"Although some secondary characters in DC Comics' mature-audience miniseries Watchmen were gay" Who?

--- The Silhouette had to leave the Minutemen when she was outted as a lesbian and then later both her and her lover are killed. This is specifically mentioned the end of issue 2 in the Under the Hood part and other parts of the story. At the end of Chapter 9 the letter to Sally Jupiter from her manager Larry Schexnayder establishes that Captain Metropolis and the Hooded Justice were gay lovers. This had been infered earlier by the comedian during his assault of Silk Spectre. Graveyardkiss 15/08/07

What's Up With Batman?
I've noticed that the Batman stories are changing alot over the years. In the 40's he killed his parents' murderers. In modern movies he still trying to get them. He also has developed Post Tramatic Stress Disorder. Don't you think whoever writes a story should make sure it doesn't change something in another? Is this crap happening with Superman too? The_Little_One_Smiles 01:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is. They are changing the stories, and their past to appeal more to changing audiences. It is called Retro-conning. Retro-con is short for retro-continuity, and is where they retrospectively change the past to fit the present stories. They are messing around with most of the main superheroes like that. Corrupt one (talk) 23:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

-Note, the phrase "ret-conning" is used much more widely than "retro-conning," especially within both the professional sphere and the fandom of comic books. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.189.207 (talk) 19:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

This is a major issue in the DC universe and they have been trying to address it since the mid 80's. Check out what they are doing with their CRISIS series (Crisis on Infinite Earths, Infinite Crisis, Final Crisis) in order to streamline story lines and even characters. It saddens me to see such great characters at odds with their own continuity issues. You gotta give Marvel props in that regard.
 * There is a full article on retconning aka Rectroactive Continuity . Initially it was used to tighten-up loose-ends due to discrepancies in descriptions of character behavior and history by previous writers and editors. However, in recent years retconning has become more of a marketing tool than anything else as it usually comes along with a closure and restarting of a series from issue one (aka a collectors item) sometimes with multiple covers. Another aspect of retconning has arisen that the mechanic is also being used by writers and editors to re-create character conceptions of existing characters based on their views or the views of a new editorial or management team as a method of stamping their "name" on the brand (aka comic book line) .WereTech (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Should super-hero be limited to modern examples?
I wonder if characters such as the mythological Hercules should be considered super-heros for the purposes of this article. If not, then it seems we need some definition of super-hero that rules him out. Could we say that the super-heros of this article are only characters in popular fiction from the 20th century on? ike9898 20:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Hercules is a marvel character too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.242.232 (talk) 02:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

In fact, Hercules was a member of the Avengers for a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 03:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Where do these hero's reside?
I was thinking that it would be nice to have a list of where super-hero's fight crime (e.g. Superman = Metropolis = which may be in: New York, Ohio, etc). Unfortunetly, I don't have an idea of how to format this list, nor do I have enough adaquate information on super-hero's as to where they reside (though, I would like to know this information). So, I make this suggestion to someone who knows their stuff.


 * I think that information more appropriately belongs in the individual hero's own article, not one about superheroes in general. Noclevername 08:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

After reading the title and before reading the text, I had thought you were talking about a super-hero's secret hide-out. So Superman's would be the Fortress of Solitude, Batman has his Bat Cave, and Green Arrow...well, has his Arrow Cave... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 03:46, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Power Rangers
Lumping in an obvious child-aimed show like Power Rangers with Smallville and Buffy is misleading to say the least. Also, we simply don’t have room for that stupid picture Rorschach567 13:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

First of all Power Rangers IS a superhero show, which is what this is all about. And in my opinion it is supiror to Smallville and Buffy. And as for the pic, it can be left out, but you must acknowlage the series. Mainly because of its historical imporatance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick lay95 (talk • contribs)

Ummm...can you explain what is the "historical importance" the Power Rangers have on the term superhero? Yes, Power Rangers are superheroes, but this article, in my opinion, isnt a listing of EVERY superhero show in existence, okay? But, I may take your side Rick, because Buffy is not a superhero like Rorschach seems to believe, and if Buffy is in the article, she should be taken out. One doesnt need a definition of superhero to know Buffy isnt one. Mailrobot


 * Complaining Power Rangers is a kiddy show is for lack of a better term juvinille. A show aimed at kids with a Superhero, is still a Superhero. Lazytown on Nickeloedon has a superhero (Sportacus) who is the epitomy of lame (see static shock) but yet he should still in there.  Many of our Super Hero shows from our childhood were aimed at children, doesn't make them not superhero shows.--Kinglink 22:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Power Ranges should be mentioned, as it is a Superhero show that is aimed at kids. It is also the most violent childs show around and has been shown to increasen agression in children who watch it. It provides in those studies an example of what the Superhero genre is teaching the young in this day and age. Corrupt one (talk) 23:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC) I wouldn't say Power Rangers are historically important, but the franchise there derive from, Super Sentai and by extension, other superhero Tokusatsu; first Henshin Hero: Kamen Rider, first Giant hero: Ultraman and first robotic hero; Ambassador Magma, Red Baron or Giant Robo all deserve a mention. Maybe the anime Gatchaman too, the first 5-man band.--79.71.100.66 (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well Power Rangers does have a single mention now (being martial artists). But Tokusatsu heroes such as Ultraman, Kamen Rider and Super Sentai do deserve a mention. --88.104.98.149 (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Super Sentai have their own page. They weren't termed super-heroes originally and as they were Super Sentai. This is specific to what it is versus being super-heroes. The translation of these series into English for American television released has added a more super-heroic aspect to the group, but they are still a "taskforce" (usually made up of 5 (five) members) with access to giant robots (aka mecha) which is quite different from the origins of what the term super-hero was related to reference. Saying that Super Sentai are super-heroes is like saying the JLA or Fantastic Four are a Sentai; and I do not think that anyone would consider them to be Sentai.
 * I agree that characters like Kamen Rider, Kikaider, Metalder, etc. come closer to the what a western super-hero is. However, they are generally fighting crime to aide normal humans but rather combating some massive conspiracy of one type or another which makes them more like Nick Fury than a traditional super-hero.
 * Terms get changed to mean more than what they originally meant, but I don't consider Clark Kent in "Smallville" or Buffy Summers in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" to be super-heroes. Though they do possess super-normal abilities, they are not fighting crime in the mode of a traditional super-hero. "Smallville" tends to be more like X-files and relies on similar kind of entourage character interaction as "Buffy the Vampire Slayer". Most notably, in relation to Smallville, Clark Kent does not put on "the costume" until the end of the final episode.WereTech (talk) 02:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

'Marvelman' more famous than Judge Dredd?
Am I unusual in thinking that the following sentence is wrong, not least because of Judge Dredd?

'Marvelman, known as Miracleman in North America, is probably the most well known original British superhero'Glennh70 10:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I as a US resident, I agree that Judge Dredd is more well known, at least because of the movie. Neither one is particularly well known.  What about Captain Britian?  He is not well known either, but I think that many US comic book readers got to know him through the Excaliber title. ike9898 16:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Judge Dredd and Dan Dare, while famous, are not superheroes, unless you are using a definition so loose as to lose all meaning. I've placed a fuller argument on your talk page. Personally, i'd argue that Captain Britain or Zenith are more famous than Marvelman, but that's just my subjective opinion. Vizjim 16:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

More well known where? I never heard of Marvelman, but I have heard much about Judge Dredd. Find a referance to their fame, else it is OR Corrupt one (talk) 22:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)LL
 * Judge Dredd is a science-fiction character. He is a police officer from the future and not a super-hero. Calling him a super-hero would be like calling the ABC Warriors, Rogue Trooper , or even Doctor Who a super-hero.
 * That being said, I think that Captain Britain my have more exposure in as a British super-hero in America than Miracleman (aka Marvleman) . Captain Britain had connection to the extremely popular X-men Series . Miracleman (aka Marvleman)had stand-alone popularity more based upon the writer Alan Moore than the series itself.WereTech (talk) 02:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Prose Section

 * I agree with Rorsach567 that we shouldn't have too long a prose section with esoteric examples. But Michael Bishop is a very prominent SF writer; his novel Count Geiger's Blues deserves a mention.  So I have once again replaced it.

Moved comments from Comics Notice Board
The Superhero Article is good, but where it loses quality is including Batman and the Green Hornet as Superheros. The two of them are technically action heros, their abilities are the same a normal human can reach. Granted they are more skilled than an average human but not Super. All Superheros should are characterised as such because they have super human abilities, abilities no other human can possess. Batman and the Green Hornet are nothing more than Action Heroes and should be removed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.88.255.139 (talk • contribs)

Original Research
Where do the terms like "brawler" and "brick" come from? --Chris Griswold 15:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * RPGs and computer/video games, primarily, I'd wager. But I'd not be surprised if they actually appeared in the comics; indeed, I'd be surpised if they'd never been used in the comics. -- Dr Archeville 12:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe that the term "brawler" has been used for quite a long time as a general term for someone that fights in a bar or on the street; the term usually used for an uncouth or untrained fighter that might be prone to fight with a nearby object(s) as a weapon. The first time that I saw the term "brick" used was in Champions :: The Super-hero Role-playing Game - note the section on Archetypes. WereTech (talk) 02:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Smile!
Help to spread Wiki:Love by posting smiles on discussion pages! To find out how, go to the discussion page under List of comic book superpowers and look under "Smile" Thanks for working hard on this discussion page!! 

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

"Significant Seven"
"Of the "Significant Seven" chosen by The Comic Book in America: An Illustrated History (1989), Marvel owns Spider-Man and Captain America and DC owns Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel and Plastic Man"

This seems odd because these are not the most significant superheroes. Most people don't know what Captain Marvel or Plastic Man even look like. I wouldn't site it. Hulk, Flash, Green Lantern, Wolverine, and Daredevil are all much more significant than Captain Marvel and Plastic Man.

--69.124.140.140 (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think this shows perhaps an unfamiliarity with a larger perspective, taking into consideration comic books' more than 60-year existence. Captain Marvel, for example, outsold Superman in the 1940s. Plastic Man was the first major humorous superhero, and extremely popular for many years, not to mention highly influential. Also keep in mind that the book, of which I have a copy myself, only goes up to the late 1980s.


 * The larger point is, one needs to consider the whole of comics history. In that respect, Captain Marvel and Plastic Man are certainly among the most significant comic-book characters. --Tenebrae (talk) 06:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that Plastic Man was listed because he was from Quality Comics (rights bought later by DC Comics) and Captain Marvel was from a Fawcett Comics (DC Comics sued Fawcett Comics saying that he was too similar to Superman, and later bought the rights to Captain Marvel, and had to list him on covers as Shazam due "confusion in the market place" with Marvel Comics [Incidentally, this is the same reason for what happened to Marvel Man's name in the USA;). All of the characters listed as DC Comics in the list were all Golden Age titles; while the Marvel characters didn't appear until the Silver Age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 03:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Superman's blurred face
The article says: "because Superman possesses super speed, he is able to move his face back and forth quickly enough when he is Superman to blur any distinguishable features". Was this really established in the Superman canon? Because it seems way too far-fetched even for a superhero comic book. M3n747 (talk) 13:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Superman would have the ability to blur his face by moving it back and forth quickly, but I don't recall any story or film in which he actually did so. It certainly is not part of his normal behavior. Primogen (talk) 04:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The original Flash definitely did this to conceal his identity, but I had not heard of Superman doing the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 03:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Superheroes are authentically US-America?
This statement in the lead section fails on the face of it: In fact, it appears that "Superman" and all later comic book superheroes created in 20th-century America are very late additions to the pantheon.&mdash;QuicksilverT @ 04:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The Epic of Gilgamesh is among the oldest superhero tales, predating The Bible.
 * The Old Testament in the Bible has stories of superheroes, such as Samson.
 * Ancient Greek and Roman mythology are filled with tales of supermen, gods and demi-gods, such as Hercules, Atlas and others, and these stories come to us from over two millennia ago.
 * Norse/Germanic mythology brought us tales of the superhero Sigurd or Siegfried.


 * When we say "superhero" we usually mean something more specific - no one in history used the term superhero before Superman (I believe), thus the term usually applies to him onward. There are some proto-superheroes like Tarzan (see below), which helped create and define the genre. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

There is definitely a difference between super-heroes and demi-gods as well. Merely possessing super-powers does not make one a superhero as the article points out. Super-hero is a term specific to costumed crime fighters (often masked) that conceal their identities while fighting crime or injustice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 03:59, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

No place for non American superheroes??
Can't see any non American examples of superheroes in this article. I tried to put up an Indian example by mentioning an indian superhero Super Commando Dhruva but it was undone. I know the editor who undid my edit is a very senior member of comics project, so I'll respect his/her decision but would like to know if this article has to be so US centric, and whether it can't accommodate a few non-American examples as well?Skagrawal4k (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

There are a good number of super-heroes that are non-American in origin. I came across Darna recently. She was definitely created as a super-heroine. I am sorry to hear that your references were deleted. It does, however, appear that they are safe on this "talk" page. I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of non-Western super-heroes. I have seen some references to British super-heroes in at least this "talk" section. I wouldn't mind seeing sub-section in the main article in regards to "Super-heroes around the World". I find it interesting to see the way that super-heroes are portrayed in general, the added cultural influences on the genre is very interesting to me.--WereTech (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Getting Facts Staraight
Some of the facts about some of the characters listed on certain parts of this page are misleading or just outright wrong e.g in the common traits section it is implied that Thors powers come from his hammer, where actually even without it he is still an Asgardian god, in the same section Spider-man "can shoot webs from his hands"(when we all know its the web shooters that allow him to do this). In the types of superheroes section, daredevil is listed as "regular" in the same way as Nightwing or Batman, but he has super powers, and in the same section Captain america is treated the same way despite being super powered. Sorry to moan on about it but these aren't obscure characters they are main characters so the information should at least be correct, it seems to me whoever wrote this article has only really shopped for DC comics. 81.98.254.217 (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * These are the least of it, brother. This article is an unmitigated mess, and needs to a top-to-bottom rewrite before it even begins to bear any semblance to a scholarly encyclopedia article. Right now it's written like a sixth-grade fan page. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The original Thor created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby (more at Kirby as far as I'm concerned) was Donald Blake. He was a doctor that found a wooden stick that he was instructed by a message in stone to tap it on the ground. When he did, he became Thor and the stick became Thor's hammer. When he tapped the Hammer on the ground a set number of times, he would revert to his form as Donald Blake. So I think you are confused by the rampant reconning so popular in comics these days. Donald Blake was definitely not an Asgardian. I agree with your issues with the other characters you have listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.49.57 (talk) 04:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Fictional characters with superhuman durability
DangerousGame came up with this category; which will include DC and Marvel sub categories. Linguistically this matches the other category; and super durability is different from strength and accelerated healing. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Today's edits
This article, which is frankly a mess, is not being helped by excessive detailed fancruft edits by LoneWolfSE. Additionally, his huge section on how "this hero is a mix of this, this and this type, and this one is a mix of this, this and this type" is not only fancruft but violates WP:SYNTH. The article needs a much more academic and encyclopedic approach, because right now it is an embarrassment and these comic-fan edits are only making it worse. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Editing "Types of Superheroes"
The editor Tenebrae has mentioned my corrections about the section Types of superheroes within this very page, and complaining about the data I have chosen to -in some way- improve it, or my intent to add new lines that I had considered may be interesting or educational for people around the world about the information contained here. I didn't create the last lines that were erased by Tenebrae's last two editings and as this person has stated, this article was "messy", therefore I tried to give it some order and improve it as I have done for the last nine years in at least 50 different pages on Wikipedia where I thought my knowledge could be useful (3 of them created by myself). It was never my intention to vandalize or create "fancruft", that information was already there. I just tried to sort it in a way it could be comprehensible. Now, I'm aware about the impressive number of pages created by this person, just letting know that I'm far to be a comic fan as stated, but merely an afficionado. So I leave this person's editings as they are for good, since apparently they are way more important for the person than for myself. LoneWolfSE (talk) 00:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The whole section Types of superheroes is already suspected of being nothing but a mess of WP:SYNTH and WP:OR, so any additions to it are going to be heavily scrutinized. If changes are done that include WP:RSs, then it's much more likely to be viewed as moving the section in the correct direction.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Minority superheroes
I'm thinking that we should remove this section from the article. Three reasons: (1)Since no aspect of the superhero trope is particular to minorities, and since the depiction of minority superheroes has pretty much mirrored the depiction of minorities in other forms of fiction throughout the genre's history, having a whole section about superhero minorities gives the subject a lot of WP:WEIGHT for no apparent reason. (2)As linked in the article, Wikipedia already has an extensive number of standalone articles about minority superheroes, so having the same material extensively covered in this article just creates extra maintenance work. (3)The section is very poorly sourced. There are only a handful of references, and they're all used to source statements like "So-and-so is black" or "So-and-so is gay" (i.e. statements which are notable in the context of that particular character's article but clearly trivial within a discussion of minority superheroes as a whole). Broad and potentially controversial statements like "superheroes are predominantly depicted as Caucasian, American middle- or upper- class, athletic, tall, attractive, heterosexual, educated, young adult male" and "superhero teams became increasingly diverse in subsequent years" (subsequent to what?) are left unsourced. Thoughts?--NukeofEarl (talk) 19:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree the section isn't great, and is poorly sourced. However, I have the same complaint about the article as a whole; I see no reason to single this section out for deletion while keeping the others.  This section, as titled, seems a fair subject for this article.  The fact it's covered in more detail in other articles is all the more reason to include a short version here.  However, we don't have many "minorities in such-and-such media" articles in general; having one or two just for superheroes does seem odd.  Perhaps that imbalance should be addressed first.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 20:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Reason (1) is the most important. The other sections in this article have problems but would clearly belong in a finished version of the article. (The only other one I'd question is "Female superheroes", but unlike minority superheroes, the depiction of female superheroes has not totally mirrored the depiction of minorities in other forms of fiction.) Having an entire section devoted to minority superheroes, even discounting the fact that it's virtually the only section of its type in the article, suggests to the reader that the depiction of minorities is a foundational, fundamental aspect of superhero fiction, when in fact the opposite is true.
 * A subject having its own article is no reason for it to have an entire section in the article for its parent subject. By that logic, this article should have sections for every single article in "Category:Superhero fiction" and all of its many subcategories.
 * I had noticed the imbalance you mention, but proposals to delete articles like List of black superheroes and LGBT themes in comics are never going to get anywhere, and as far as the reverse approach goes, personally I have no desire to create a bunch of articles like "List of Asian-American fictional secret agents" and "List of Jews in romance novels".--NukeofEarl (talk) 17:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Again, I'm not a big fan of this section, but I'm not convinced it merits deletion based on the given reasons.
 * (1) It's OR to say that minorities in superheroes mirrored other media. Normally, I would say that the burden of proof of relevance would be on the added content, that is, we should require proof that minorities in superheroes weren't mirrored in other media.  But here, with all sources poor in this and related articles throughout, the fact that there is a child article is sufficient for this environment.
 * This leads back to (2), which was brought up again anyway. For (2), I completely disagree; a subject having its own article is a reason to have a section in the parent article.  It's not a requirement, but it is a good reason ("List" articles generally excluded).
 * The rest of the reasoning seems to indicate that the child articles should be deleted, but won't be, so we should at least delete this section that refers to them. That sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT.
 * I see no reason to single this section out from the others as being poor enough to simply blank. And I think we really do need articles like Minorities in media.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 23:52, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * WP: OR applies only to article content, not to talk page discussion.
 * I had hoped you would at least take a look at "Category:Superhero fiction" before responding. Let me enlighten you: "Category:Superhero fiction" has well over 200 articles. Are you seriously arguing that this article should have over 200 subsections whose sole purpose is to summarize information which appears elsewhere on Wikipedia?
 * Your accusation of WP:IDONTLIKEIT is obvious baiting, since I'd already spent several paragraphs explaining to you why this section does not belong here under Wikipedia policy. Sorry to disappoint you, but I make a habit of never taking the bait.
 * You keep saying "single out"; is it then your opinion that we should remove all the current subsections from the article?--NukeofEarl (talk) 18:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I follow WP:AGF. I never attempt  baiting/trolling; there's no purpose in that.
 * We have no source stating minorities in superheroes is mirrored other media. Thus it's OR to use that for a reason to affect the article contents by deleting a section.
 * I never suggested we need hundreds of subsections. I only countered the suggestion that having a sub-article is a reason to delete a section; it's usually a reason to keep.
 * If there was a proposal to remove all unsourced sections in this article, then yes, I would more likely to favor that over this proposal. But WP:PRESERVE would probably apply.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 17:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC).

"America's Best Comics" used in a misleading maner.
Given this Wiki's propensity for creating dead links, it seems like asking for trouble to link the caption to a magazine that went out of business in 1950 to an article about a subdivision of a corporation founded half a century later. This seems like us just begging to be misunderstood, and while there is a sentence in that article that mentions the magazine, vaguely, and the characters were revived presumably for the precise reason of giving the illusion of antiquity and continuity, we have a long standing habit of pruning such sentences, leaving only confusing and misleading links. Wikipedia doesn't exist for the purpose of aiding Alan Moore in his alteration of past events, a violation of the laws of causality that his representatives famously admitted No Contest to by settling out of Court in a suit before the State of California. While I ideologically support Moore's imposible chicanery, personaly feel it deserves aid, and might even admit is appropriate in an article so linked to super-villainy, such is not our purpose here, nor is it unbiased and appropriate behavior for Wikipedia. The image is evocative, and appropriate, any conceivable terse labeling of it, however, is problematic. "America's Best Comics" is mentioned twice in the current version of this article, both time linking to the page of the same name, in the text, it is defined as the company described in that article, as a caption it is under an image of a publication with only the most tenuous and fantastic connection to the magazine so labeled. If we are not going to provide an article about the original America's Best Comics, nor even a section about more antique entities that bore the name in our current article about a concern founded decades later, it is confusing, perhapse deliberately so, to suggest a connection and to provide a misleading and deceptively counter-informative hyper-link.71.235.31.212 (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what all this fanciful nonsense is about, but the caption beneath a Golden Age America's Best Comics links to a sentence that reads, "America's Best Comics was a prominent Better/Nedor/Standard title during the 1940s Golden Age of comic books, starring such heroes as the Black Terror and the Fighting Yank."


 * As for the mention of the modern-day company, it's completely contextual and appropriate in that it's in a section about the term "superhero", and the use of an alternate term in a mainstream American comic. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

¿Topless Starfire?
While I, as an occasional, casual reader of the form can personaly attest to the general accuracy of the characterization of the iconic outfits of Peejee, Frost and Starfire, said descriptions, occurring in the Female superheroes, subsection, appear to be either unsourced personal opinion of the editor, or to be falsely attributed to the web pages that the conclusion that they are examples for cites. I was unaware that Starfire's current uniform leaves her breasts uncovered; I haven't seen this and the two authorities provided in the footnotes most immediately following this claim do not appear to mention it. Perhapse the editor did not intend to state that Starfire's outfit has been reduced solely to "thong, pelvic covering, mask, and stiletto heels," though given that the statement is provided as evidence of objectification, it certainly gives that impression. This is like claiming that a doctor who has performed surgery on a patient has only provided antibiotics when making a claim of negligence, instead of the more correct statement that they provided antibiotics as part of their treatment. It seems like a misleading statement used to support an argument that a more accurate statement would be less supported by. In any event, the editor's discription of all three notable female superheroes is a highly opinionated statement (that I, and most would agree with) that appears to be personal research. A more objective discription of the outfits in question could be argued to fall under the cases appropately supported by a primary source, but none is given, and more importantly, the use of the statement, as an interpretation of the work in question is expressly required, as per Wikipedia standards, to be supported by a credible expert in a secondary source. It is a clear violation of our policy to pass off our personal views, no matter how correct we might think them, as objective facts. 71.235.31.212 (talk) 00:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I've addressed the WP:TONE and misleading details of that mention. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

ambiguously gay duo
I don't see them here under lgbt.71.218.229.155 (talk) 04:36, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Where there's a link to a "main article," we're only supposed to have a short summary. This section is already overlong for a topic with its own article. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Superhero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120330034735/http://ask.yahoo.com:80/20070503.html to http://ask.yahoo.com/20070503.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150708054301/http://www.gadflyonline.com:80/8-13-01/ftr-girls-allowed.html to http://www.gadflyonline.com/8-13-01/ftr-girls-allowed.HTML

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Superhero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superhero
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://ask.yahoo.com/20070503.html

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 03:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Copy Edit
I'm going to go through and copyedit today. I don't know how to do the Working and Done tags, but I just wanted to say I'm going to work on it :) Stayhomegal (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Superhero Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
Hello,

We plan on adding how queer characters are portrayed in print as opposed to film. We specifically want to focus on straight washing of the characters in the film adaptations and how the print comics provide the benefit of representation to the readers. One of us would be focusing on print, the other on film and the last on how this effects the people reading and watching.

Our sources include,

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=8692f2fd-ffe5-454d-9bad-25a6d96c2a76%40sessionmgr114&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=505242378&db=aft

Lecker, Michael J. "“Why Can't I Be Just Like Everyone Else?”: A Queer Reading Of The X-Men." International Journal Of Comic Art9.1 (2007): 679-687. Art Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/fashion/coming-out-as-gay-superheroes.html

http://www.salon.com/2016/02/12/dont_straightwash_deadpool_its_time_for_marvel_to_let_a_queer_superhero_be_queer_on_film/

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/08/03/do-marvel-have-a-problem-with-lgbt-superheroes/

http://talkingcomicbooks.com/2015/01/16/important-queer-moments-marvel-comics/

http://moviepilot.com/posts/2951531

http://geeksout.org/blogs/nathan-tabak/gay-characters-comics-bumpy-road-marvel-comics-mid-2000s

http://comicsalliance.com/hercules-marvel-lgbtq/

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=96ed8397-e050-453d-922e-2fe842be1e07%40sessionmgr111&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=113126776&db=fth

Alter, Ethan. "Deadpool." Film Journal International 119.3 (2016): 56-58. MasterFILE Elite. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=96ed8397-e050-453d-922e-2fe842be1e07%40sessionmgr111&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=53466809&db=edb

Schott, Gareth. "From Fan Appropriation To Industry Re-Appropriation: The Sexual Identity Of Comic Superheroes." Journal Of Graphic Novels & Comics 1.1 (2010): 17. Publisher Provided Full Text Searching File. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=9&sid=96ed8397-e050-453d-922e-2fe842be1e07%40sessionmgr111&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=100477565&db=ulh

EHRHARDT, MICHELLE. "Flash Forward." Advocate 1077 (2015): 25. MAS Ultra - School Edition. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=11&sid=96ed8397-e050-453d-922e-2fe842be1e07%40sessionmgr111&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=apn.3M2B708I&db=pwh

"Superhero role for this gay actor is a giant stride for Hollywood." Sunshine Coast Daily 2014: 24. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=13&sid=96ed8397-e050-453d-922e-2fe842be1e07%40sessionmgr111&hid=122&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=18785401&db=a9h

Palmer-Mehta, Valerie, and Kellie Hay. "A Superhero For Gays?: Gay Masculinity And Green Lantern." Journal Of American Culture28.4 (2005): 390-404. Academic Search Complete. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/geek/2015/07/07/52-lgbt-superheroes-and-villains

"52 LGBT Superheroes and Villains." 52 LGBT Superheroes and Villains. N.p., 07 July 2015. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

Garfield, Leanna. "11 LGBT Superheroes That Have Forever Changed Comics." Tech Insider. N.p., 14 Nov. 2015. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://www.techinsider.io/lgbt-superheroes-that-have-forever-changed-comics-2015-11

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/fashion/coming-out-as-gay-superheroes.html?_r=0

Gustines, George Gene. "Coming Out as Gay Superheroes." The New York Times. The New York Times, 23 Dec. 2015. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

Romano, Andrea, and Bob Al-Green. "14 LGBT Superheroes You Need to Know about." Mashable. N.p., 19 July 2015. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://mashable.com/2015/07/19/lgbt-comic-book-superheroes/

Nichols, JamesMichael. "Midnighter, DC Comics Superhero, Will Use Grindr In Upcoming Comic Book." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 12 Mar. 2015. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/12/midnighter-dc-comics-grin_n_6856728.html

Lotrian, Sasha. "A New Lesbian Superhero." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 2 Feb. 2016. Web. 15 Mar. 2016.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sasha-lotrian/lesbian-superhero_b_1625952.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljmatasker (talk • contribs) 21:38, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Why does the History section almost exclusively focus on female characters?
It is important to discuss female superheroes, but the History section reads like a history of super heroines. As of 4/25/16, the History section discusses 44 female characters and 7 male characters. In a genre that is dominated by male characters this is a very skewed history. Political and social agendas have no place in an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia should be objective, and an objective history of a genre with mostly male characters should not disproportionately focus on female characters; at the very least, not at the expense of depicting a complete picture of that history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.37.165.148 (talk) 01:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I definitely agree, the article should present the common characteristics and elements of superhero-type characters and superhero-oriented fiction. It is great for an author to use fiction to propel their political viewpoint but at the end of the day this is entertainment. Even if a character represents a minority in superhero fiction like being gay; Should we note that in this very article other minorities like Charles Xavier being paraplegic and Daredevil being blind, should we note that The Ancient One is Tibetan? No.--143.167.27.39 (talk) 00:41, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Too Politically Minded and Too American-centric
This should be more focused on story writing introducing from classic all-good heroes to anti-heroes like Punisher, from upbeat storylines to darker and more depressing storylines, the introduction of concepts like capes or, color-coded teams, masks, transformation sequence.

At the end of the day it's great that authors use fiction to tell the world their political viewpoints; pacifism, feminism and so on but again this is fiction for entertainment.

Secondly the focus on only American superheroes. This is where the focus on race issues comes from. In Japanese manga, most (but not all) characters are Asian so it's not really revolutionary to introduce an Asian superhero, what is revolutionary perhaps is introducing a heroes with a mask, a hero with a transformation sequence or a hero without the staple cape (the justification in The Incredibles). Having minority superheroes in the United States did change things but let's not turn their minority into a gimmick.--143.167.27.39 (talk) 00:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


 * To expand on moving this article to being less American-centric. We should mention of superheroes as if they were American superheroes i.e. instead of writing "H, the first superhero from country C, was the first such example of a superhero with ability A", just write "H was the first such example of a superhero with ability A". Also, a superhero can be American (e.g. Miss America from Battle Fever J) but not be created by an American author or company.--143.167.27.39 (talk) 00:55, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Isn't Namor the first comic-book antihero?
Our article currently reads:

"One superpowered character was portrayed as an antiheroine, a rarity for its time: the Black Widow, a costumed emissary of Satan who killed evildoers in order to send them to Hell — debuted in Mystic Comics #4 (Aug. 1940), from Timely Comics, the 1940s predecessor of Marvel Comics."

. . . which is fine, but Namor is not mentioned in this article at all. Since our Namor article defines him (with a source) as "the first comic-book antihero", and he was created for Timely BEFORE Claire Voyant/Black Widow, it seems to me we should mention him. The same source could be used from his article.

I'm not suggesting the above excerpt should be deleted.

--Ben Culture (talk) 07:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

LGBT Characters
Any reason why Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn aren't included?? I mean, they're pretty popular and well-known right now due to the release of Suicide Squad and the upcoming Harley movie. And there are other antivillains included, if anyone claims they're villains so they're not a part of the page. TaylorLane bore me 19:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Mystery Men
It should be noted that, before the term "superhero" was popularized with the advent of Superman and Batman, these types of characters were referred to as "mystery men" or "men of mystery." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.36 (talk) 21:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Superhero. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/66vunFgcm?url=http://www.toonopedia.com/clvoyant.htm to http://www.toonopedia.com/blwidow1.htm
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/66nTzorDi?url=http://www.toonopedia.com/missfury.htm to http://www.toonopedia.com/missfury.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Superhero. 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/20160304054539/http://www.anvilpublishing.com/shop/from-darna-to-zsazsa-zaturnnah-desire-and-fantasy/ to http://www.anvilpublishing.com/shop/from-darna-to-zsazsa-zaturnnah-desire-and-fantasy/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Images
Per Non-free content criteria, we cannot arbitrarily use non-free images of super heroes just because they are popular. This article is about superheroes as fictional characters, not any particular character, and so any freely licensed or public domain image that adequately illustrates a superhero will suffice, be they obscure like Black Hood, The Flame or Mr. Scarlet. I removed a non-free image of The Flash, added by an IP address as "a more well-known superhero" for this reason. Non-free images can only be used if, among other reasons, the images themselves are contextually essential to understanding the subject, per WP:NFCCP. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

75% about females and minorities
The article as it is now, is around 75% about female superheroes and minority(*) superheroes. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to note that both of them also exist. But honestly, the most famous and successful and longest-running superheroes are white males. The only spot in the whole article, where you can see this is the list at the end of the introduction, that goes: "Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, Wonder Woman, Hulk, Green Lantern, the Flash, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, Iron Man". I am not talking about removing anything to reduce that amount of "interesting notes". But I would suggest that there needs to be something added to, lets say, talk more about superheroes than talk about gender equality and minorities. Superheroes may also be about these topics. But mostly they are about child fantasies, almightiness fantasies, godlike powers, modern gods, the wish that every evildoer is sooner or later brought to justice and they are also a strong example of good-or-evil (nothing in-between). Also about the newest science discoveries (nuclear energy for example) and the belief that these discoveries may make everything possible (including superhuman powers). We should also talk about the kinds of powers that superhumans possess. If you break it down, the list is not very long. And also most of them are not new inventions, but heavily inspired by ancient gods and medieval magic. (*): minority when viewn from a producers point of view. Fact is that white people and men are the minorities on this planet. Just a funny fact.--TeakHoken217.247.38.67 (talk) 11:42, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

"Who's Who" of superheroes
I'm bothered by the article which seems to emphasize a seemingly unending list of "superheroes" (or -heroines). The point of the article should be about the attributes that makes a superhero(-ine) separate from normal (mortal, or otherwise non-)heroes. I'd rather hear more about Real heroes and less about SuperHeroes. 2600:6C48:7006:200:D84D:5A80:173:901D (talk) 03:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Doc Savage should be mentioned as a prototype.
First appearing in 1933, many of the tropes that went into the superhero genre began with him, up to and including his 'Fortress of Solitude' in the Arctic. No secret identity, and he didn't wear a mask or costume, but his physical and mental abilities were clearly depicted as superhuman, even though they were explained as the result of dedicated training from childhood. It's a bit tricky writing him into the current introduction, since he doesn't perfectly fit any of the models discussed. Thoughts?

The Pre-1940 section does mention that several pulp fiction characters and non-costumed characters with super strength were precursors or early examples of superheroes. If you can find a specific reference to Doc Savage's relation to the genre, he could be a good addition. Dimadick (talk) 13:16, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

"Superheroines"
Ugh! This word makes my skin crawl, differentiating female heroes? What's the community view on this word? Does it belong in the dustbin of history with other unnecessarily feminized words? 79.75.152.60 (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, radical feminist propaganda and political correctness like what you have posted makes my skin crawl. There is nothing wrong with having different words for men and women. To each his own, I suppose. However, just because you don't like a word doesn't mean it should be censored from the article. 186.6.13.141 (talk) 04:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Why are they popular now?
I would like to see a section with analysis on why the superhero genre became popular. Why do we now need heroes with supernatural powers? During the 1800s instead of superhero stories in YA fiction there were pirate stories or explorer stories or cowboy stories or detective stories, all starring heroes with human, not supernatural, abilities. And why the current rise in popularity of superhero films and comics in the last 2 decades? It seems to have occurred simultaneously with the great rise in economic inequality in the US. Is there a connection? --ChetvornoTALK 19:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Consider the longevity of some characters - at least the Marvel and DC comics superheros possess some sort of immortality.  Some have "died" only to be resurrected.   Fiction allows such freedom.   It fails reality but allows succeeding generations to give characters new life and new dimensions.    Such fiction is never-ending so long as it supports a popular audience for multiple generations.   2600:6C48:7006:200:B056:6066:1296:EF0B (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * A "never-ending" succession of stories can also be written about mortal characters, as the literature around human epic heroes like King Arthur show. And this still doesn't explain why contemporary heroes have super powers.  Popular heroes before the 1930s such as Dick Tracey, Bulldog Drummond, Alan Quatermain, Buck Rogers, Sherlock Holmes, Zorro, the Lone Ranger, Daniel Boone, Blackbeard, Captain Nemo, Robin Hood, Tintin, John Carter, Tarzan,Richard Hannay, Ulysses, Beowulf, and the Scarlet Pimpernel were ordinary humans.  Why did superheroes suddenly become popular during the 1930s?  Why did they have a resurgence in popularity beginning in the 1990s? --ChetvornoTALK 11:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021
e.g ironman joe wesborn jimmy fallon captoainnflasfgbrg fdv 210.185.97.239 (talk) 02:09, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 04:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 9 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mynameismybuisiness.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Why is this article so one sided?
There is a heavy focus on female superheroes through the whole article. While I have no problem with that on the surface it reads more like an article on female superheroes specifically. There's more about Carol Ferris than Hal Jordan and that seems ridiculous to me. 100.19.58.9 (talk) 16:52, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Bias in the female superheroes section
The whole section is massively biased, but this part in particular is terrible:

Through the overdeveloped bodies of the heroes or the seductive mannerisms of the villains, women in comic books are used as subordinates to their male counterparts, regardless of their strength or power.[80] In 2017's Wonder Woman, she had the power of a god, but was still drawn to a much weaker, mortal male character.[78] This can be explained by the sociological concept "feminine apologetic," which reinforces a woman's femininity to account for her masculine attributes (strength, individualism, toughness, aggressiveness, bravery).[78] Women in comic books are considered to be misrepresented due to being created by men, for men.[77][79]

It takes the notion uncritically and fails to point out that Wonder Woman's direct male counterpart, Superman, has a relationship with a human woman. So do many male superheroes, like Spider-Man. This section really shouldn't be in here and uncritically presented as fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.6.80 (talk) 03:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

1917 Not 1899
why is the article allowed to say "The word superhero dates back to 1899." when both the source and the main article both state 1917? 2600:4040:5165:2100:8043:4F4B:3C1D:31E1 (talk) 13:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)