Talk:The New Adventures of Superman (TV series)

Merge with Adventures of Superboy
As far as I can tell, there was only one show, The New Adventures of Superman that featured Superboy segments. The Adventures of Superboy was not a show unto itself. Rhindle The Red 13:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There was some discussion about this when we created these Filmation articles (I'm sorry, but I can't remember where) because of the unique situation with the segments. Anyway, neither the Superman or Superboy segments were really a show on the their own; the first year the segments were combined under the program name Adventures of Superman but then the new segments were part of other shows (but kept the individual Adv of Superman title cards. The Superman and Superboy segments did always seem to be used together, but I think we thought it would be cluttered and confusing if the two were part of one article (since they each had their own titles).


 * I was actually going to create some kind of navigation template to make this clear and connect the articles better, I will try to do that ASAP. If that doesn't help I'm sure we can find a way to merge them cleanly. TAnthony 16:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Here's a thought. How about a single page for each show and then separate pages for each "collection" (something like List of The New Adventures of Superman animated segments, List of Adventures of Superboy animated segments, List of Aquaman animated segments). Rhindle The Red 17:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Each title may not have been its own show, but given the special circumstances of each segment, and the wealth of information culled from each, merging would only make a big mess. —scarecroe 23:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per scarecroe. Davey4 13:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion: eliminate (TV series) from article title
While doing a little work on Bob Haney, my attempt to correct an inaccurate Wikilink&mdash;the text referred to this television series, but the link was to the article on Superman himself&mdash;discovered that The New Adventures of Superman would link to a disambiguation page with links to this article, the one on Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, and nothing else. I believe that this idea is bad, that a "Not to be confused..." note/link at the top of each actual article would be sufficient. There is indeed one here but not on L&C (though I intend to suggest one there on its talk page as soon as I post this). Accordingly, I submit that both that page and the parenthetical aside "(TV series)" to this article's title is unnecessary. I strongly submit that the disambig. page be deleted and this one's title be be changed (i.e. this article be "moved") to simply "The New Adventures of Superman." --Ted Watson (talk) 23:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that it makes complete sense to move this article to simply The New Adventures of Superman with a hatnote referral to Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and vise versa. This is really standard procedure, as disambig pages are usually not used for only two items.&mdash; TAnthonyTalk 23:29, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm actually going to point this out to an Admin I know who "specializes" in disambiguation issues, this may be a "no-brainer" situation in which he can "be bold."&mdash; TAnthonyTalk 23:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A couple of points, as I look at it:
 * Disambig pages are not needed for lists of two (or even three) items if one of them is the primary topic.
 * If there is no primary topic, then a disambiguation page is needed even for two items.
 * If either entry can be identified as the primary topic, there is a benefit to some readers (the ones looking for the primary topic) and no detriment to any readers (the ones looking for the other article still have exactly one click-through to get to their desired page).
 * So the proposal here is whether this TV series is the primary topic for "The New Adventures of Superman". But I'd recommend asking that question at Talk:The New Adventures of Superman. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Significant revisions
I was first drawn to the section "History" by a newly added sentece crediting Jackson Beck with the voices of Perry White and Jimmy Olsen, as the latter was voiced by a credited&mdash;and acknowledged in the cast list further down the page&mdash;Jack Grimes. However, I further noticed the adjacent statement that Collyer and Alexander had previously played Clark/Supes and Lois, respectively, on both the old radio series and the 1940s theatrical cartoon shorts. Her participation in the latter is dubious, disputed, and not well supported, as can be seen at Talk:Superman (1940s cartoons). Admittedly a lot of what's there is my work, but I am not the only editor there who thoroughly disputes Alexander's involvement, nor even the first. We both do cite objective reasons for not believing it, and I am going to remove that part of the sentence here, especially since it is unsourced. Also, I know of no source that suggests that Alexander was replaced at any point in this run, so I will also remove Julie Bennett from the aforementioned cast list. [Oops! Just found the ref cite here for that; I'll just fix a slight spacing error in that and leave the statement in, of course.--Ted Watson (talk) 21:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)] Sources do indicate that Ted Knight replaced Beck as White, but not until the second season, i.e., The Superman/Aquaman Hour of Adventure, so I'm removing that as well. Beck and Knight did voice various throwaway characters (as Beck had done back on the radio version and Knight would do on many Filmation Saturday morning cartoon shows), but they were credited only as narrators of the Superman and Superboy shorts, respectively. I'll leave putting that in open to debate. I am adding the other principals to the voice section of the infobox with Collyer, as well. My edit summary will be a Wikilink to this. --Ted Watson (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Who was the original distributor of this series?
This series predates by several years DC Comics' ownership by Kenney (which later became Warner Communications). The credits for the show themselves say an "N.P.P. TV Presentation", which would make it appear that DC (then "National Periodical Publications") distributed the cartoon series to TV itself. Is there a reference that can clarify this? --FuriousFreddy (talk) 11:18, 21 June 2014 (UTC)