Talk:DC vs. Marvel

Trailer

What do you guys think about adding the fanboy trailer to this page? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KxIHVGch8I The joyous one (talk) 09:20, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

what i dont see is why they dont make another.

any one agree? -artha14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.3.150 (talk) 06:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, DC and Marvel are too different. DC sucked in the 90s storywise and is good now. Marvel was good in the 90s and sucks now. Wolverine admantium and magnetos return vs the off-centered superman's death storyline? I mean, Com' on. Both Marvel and DC are good except marvel was better in art and story at one time. No wonder it won that miniseries. Even the marvel crossovers were better. Now though, DC is clearly on top in both categories in their comics, with hit artists like jim lee and stories like JLAs grant morrison run DC is better and got alot better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.42.105 (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

the First

DC and Marvel's first collaboration was a comic book adaptation of the Wizard of Oz.

The first DC/Marvel crossover was published by DC Comics and it was Superman vs. the Amazing Spider-Man, published in 1976. The second crossover was published in Marvel Treasury Edition #28 and was cover-titled Superman and Spider-Man, from 1981.

These and the third (Batman vs. the Incredible Hulk) and then fourth (Teen Titans/X-Men) crossover appeared to be in a continuity seperate from either DC or Marvel. There was fifth planned, a Justice League of America/Avengers crossover drawn by George Perez but it was cancelled. gg

I'm not going through this.

Captain America vs. Batman

It appears that Batman wins, yes, but immediately afterwards he says, "I lost." Could somebody please explain this to me, possibly adjusting the article to clear up this confusion?

It is Cap that says "I lost." If it appears Batman said this it is likely simply due to poor word balloon placement (i.e., a minor production error). Batman won the vote, and thus his batarang was shown to hit Cap, whereas Cap's shield did not hit Batman. Chris1435 20:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

If it is poor word balloon placement, it wouldn't be connected to the same word balloon that says "Your good with that shield". Batman doesn't have a shield for Cap to tell him he was good with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.124.45 (talk) 11:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The Joker

The Joker seems to be aware of a previous Spider-man crossover, while Spider-man isn't. This may indicate a fourth wall awareness.

• The Spider-Man that showed up in the crossover was Peter Parker, the Spider-Man in DC Vs Marvel is Ben Reilly

The Brothers

Are the brothers mentioned outside of the crossover? I heard they were mentioned in Silver Surfer.

Hulk vs Superman

I am very confused about this battle as superman is superhumanly fast right ? then couldnt superman just use his super-speed and smack the hulk with full force punches and as a result defeat the hulk easily ?

The whole thing about superhuman speed is ambiguous. Superman can move at superhuman speeds but doesn't often utilize it in combat. Nearly 10 years ago, the Hulk battled a character called Gladiator. Gladiator is a Superman-inspired character more often popping up in the X-Men titles every now and again. He has powers similar to Superman including superhuman strength, invulnerability, flight, heat vision, etc. He can also run at supersonic speeds but I don't believe that it's ever really been shown in a combat type of situation. I don't know why really. I don't generally follow Superman but I've heard that the character has rarely utilized his full speed in combat situations. Maybe the writers simply don't feel like coming up with an equalizer to combat Superman's speed. Odin's Beard 00:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The Thing is yes Superman could easly defeat any one. But he isn't that way. He believes in a certain way of fighting. As you notice with the battle with darkseid you see how strong he really is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.3.28 (talk) 02:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure that Superman came up with a knockout blow to put Hulk through a mountain and win the contest.

hulk would and should have won, hulk has killed a god before by picking up europe and crushing the guy with it so how could he not beat superman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CHOADS (talk • contribs) 23:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Picking up Europe? Are you sure that happened?77.11.178.215 (talk) 00:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Superman win this battle Mohamadwolf (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Cap vs Batman explanation

Earlier on in the series, Cap throws his shield past Bane. Bane assumes he missed, but like a boomerang, the shield returns and knocks bane out cold when it slams into his head. This is what happened to Batman, which is why he then says you're good with that shield.

How many

How many issues did this series run for? CmdrClow 00:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

4 issues, I believe 2 were made by Marvel and 2 were made by DC. RobJ1981 01:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Card sets?

Is it really necessary to list each and every card for the card sets on the Marvel vs DC page? Wouldn't it be easier to just create a page (or pages) that just list the sets. It seems like clutter to me.... RobJ1981 01:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Other DC and Marvel crossovers

Does this really need to be on Marvel vs DC? I can understand some of it being there... but wouldn't a "see also" section be easier? It seems like clutter just like the whole card sets section. RobJ1981 05:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC) bf FREGENE VWEGBA

I was wondering the same thing myself. I thought the article was devoted to the Marvel vs DC crossover in and of itself, not it and every other crossover the two companies have had with one another. As far as the cards go, I don't really believe that they're necessary either. Maybe a "see also" section like you suggested or just mention that a card set surrounding the crossover was released as well. Odin's Beard 00:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

• I created one page for the card sets, as I don't see why there needs to be several for them. They are somewhat notable I suppose, but there isn't much about them. The page can be found here List of DC versus Marvel card sets. RobJ1981 18:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of this section - it might be worth creating a "List of DC and Marvel crossovers" article. The intercompany crossovers article is a long one and this would be of a more usable size. (Emperor 00:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

Since someone refuses to let me remove material without mentioning it on the talk page, here goes. A section titled "Misrepresentations" has a completely meaningless title, especially since the title is nowhere explained in the section. Moreover, comics are littered with in-joke cameos of characters from other companies. It's silly to have a section that includes only one example out of dozens or more of them; and including every one in existence would be ridiculously unwieldy. Ken Arromdee 07:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

There, that wasn't so hard was it? Nothing wrong with editing information in the articles. However, you up and deleted an entire section. Granted, it wasn't a large section, but that's irrelevant. Deleting an article section without discussing the reason why is vandalism according to Wikipedia policy. Odin's Beard 00:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Telling the story

We are certainly allowed to cover the events that occured in the series. The only thing we can't do is tell it in the exact same format as the books were in. (Copyright violation.) The version you created is very clear and concise, but doesn't include any of the storyline other than a basic introduction into the concept behind it. We need to include all major events in the storyline from beginning to end. This obviously includes the results of the battles between popular comic characters. If you feel that the article is too fawning or fanboyish, feel free to fix it up, but please don't remove the basic content of the article in the process. (Unless, of course, the content is innaccurate in some way.) Thanks! Sperril 13:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to add: I'm seriously considering removing the "other crossovers" section. This article is about a specific crossover. Any other notable crossovers should have their own articles. There is already an Intercompany crossover article that serves as a good list. It seems redundant and off-topic here. Sperril 14:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There's no "supposed" to about any of this. Providing a blow by blow account of a story is best left to a fan site, and 99% of the time smacks of POV, which it does here. The gist is fine. There is also no need to provide a huge list of all the crossovers - there is a link that sends the reader to the appropriate page. Again, it smacks of fan devotion and is in practical terms sloppy. This is certainly the case here as the passage is convuluted and poorly written.

Asgardian 00:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the entry needs a longer plot summary than the one given (and the three paragraphs [1] doesn't seem excessive) - just removing it all doesn't seem the way forward. Tag i as being overly long and/or trim it down a bit. As I've said above the crossovers section should go. (Emperor 01:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

First, since we are all in agreement the the crossover section needs to go, I've removed it. I'll reproduce it below in case someone wants to add it to the main Intercompany crossover article. I have, however, restored the original plot summary and the results of the matches. I think the casual reader who has never read the actual books will still find the older 3 paragraphs much more informative than the new ones. Compared to most other popular fiction, (Harry Potter, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc.) I don't think the original version of the article was too fanboyish at all. Sperril 07:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Asgardian

I noted that you changed the article back to the version you have been pushing for. Again, you haven't left a comment on the talk page explaining how we are going to come to terms with the issues that other editors and I have with your version. I think we could come to a compromise version if we go through the older version of the article piece by piece. (Pick some information in the article that you have a problem with, and we can hash it out here. Once we are done, pick another piece of information... that kind of thing.) I would really look forward to going through this process with you as you seem to know your stuff when it comes to comics. The major issue I have with the changes you are trying to make is that they don't tell enough of the story. I don't follow comics like I used to and depend on being able to come to wikipedia to learn about what is happening with major story arcs without having to read the books themselves. I think the more information we can provide the lay reader about a specific book, the better. I agree with you that we can't let the article become fanboyish to the point where it includes original research that wasn't directly addressed by the book itself. Thanks! Sperril 00:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I think the technical changes made in the last few days can stay as they are OK and for the better. The wording is still very POV based, but that can be addressed. I'll retain the recent minor changes and then pad out the synopsis a tad more.

Asgardian 04:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Asgardian, as best I can tell, you carried out exactly the same revert, again. I actually downloaded and read the series yesterday to try and understand the topic a bit more. I have tried to come to some kind of compromise, where the most fannish elements of the original version are removed, but undid the parts of your preferred version that actually detracted from the article quality (editing out the reference list, a harder to read and less ifnormative list of battles). I would appreciate comments from everyone on this - is this a reasonable compromise to work from?

As I am now involved in content, I will no longer use any administrative tools on this issue, but I will still warn you to stop wholescale reverting to your preferred version (please read WP:OWN); if you keep reverting to your own version against the preferences of a lot of other editors, you will end up being blocked, again, possibly for a lot longer. Neil ム 11:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Please consider this last statement by User:Neil as a fair warning. Your actions here and elsewhere are seeming to become tendentious once again. Just a suggestion, but perhaps you might wish to read/re-read Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Verifiability. - jc37 06:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I kept the CBG reference; added a tidier mention of Dark Claw and retained another user's version of the match ups. I'll even tidy up the Ben Reilly statement and a minor phrase that's sloppy, and then we're there. A little perspective please!

Asgardian 12:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it's just about there now. For now! Neil ム 13:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The other Crossover material that was removed

I've removed a big section on other crossovers because I don't think it belongs in this article. The removed material is pasted below as a reference in case anyone wanted to add it to the Intercompany crossover article. Sperril 07:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Moved material to Talk:Marvel vs. DC/material. Neil ム 11:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Massive rehaul planned

There are some serious problems with this article. The plot synopsis is completely wrong, and there is no mention of the related comics, such as the Amalgam comics. I'm planning to fix this in the very near future (as soon as I can reread the series), but if anyone can get to it before me, please do. --Unknownwarrior33 (talk) 20:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I reverted the last edit to make the plot summary actually correct, but there is a lot more to be done for this article. Again, I plan to get to it very shortly, but if someone else can do so before me, please do. --Unknownwarrior33 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

File:DC vs Marvel 01.png Deleted

An image used in this article, File:DC vs Marvel 01.png, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by Common Good for the following reason: Copyright violation: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:DC vs Marvel 01.png: no licensing, but most likely copyrighted image

What should I do?

You can remove the code for this image from the article text (which can look messy), however a different bot may already have done so. You could also try to search for new images to replace the one deleted. If you think the deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Who won?

The article says the loser of the overall DC v Marvel contest would cease to exist. Since both universes apparently still exist, was it declared a draw? Or was some other resolution found? ---lethe ^{talk +} 15:48, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

The winner is unknown Mohamadwolf (talk) 04:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Two Versions?

"Two versions of this paperback exist with one edition having DC winning three of the five fan voted battles and another version of the trade paperback with Marvel winning three of the fan voted battles. In both editions only Superboy and Lobo lose their respective bouts."

I would like to see a source for this, since the articlke itself only states the existence of ONE paperback. Which is the other, and where is the source that legitimate this claim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.24.169.75 (talk) 11:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Merge "Marvel vs. DC" cards here

Hi all, it turns out we have a separate article for a set of trading cards that were released to promote this series. I'm not sure sources exist to expand that article much beyond its current scope. Should we merge that article here? Ajpolino (talk) 01:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I think that a merge is preferable to the standalone article as it is. My only concern is that the source article has absolutely no sourcing. Joyous! | Talk 23:03, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

no. Sirhewlett (talk) 03:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC)