Metahuman?[]
How do we know he's a metahuman? He did participate in metabrawl, but I don't think Roulette was overly concerned with the accuracy of the term. Wildcat is Human, Wonder Woman is an Amazon, and Shayera is Thanagarian. Unless there's a DCAU source, his species is conjecture and doesn't belong in the infobox.
- Ha ha, you forgot to sign! (jk)
Well, here I explain why we could conjecture characters' species if not stated on-screen. But I wouldn't oppose to completely remove every conjecture from the infoboxes.
― Thailog 11:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC) - Then again, we would need to remove every single species not confirmed on the DCAU, like every human. ― Thailog 11:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm know there are some human characters referred to as "human," but I think if they look human, and it's on Earth, and there is no reason to believe they aren't human, then it is reasonable to assume that said background figure is a human. In fact, I think the original Atomic Skull in the comics was purely human, but that's neither here nor there.--Tim Thomason 01:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- but I think if they look human, and it's on Earth, and there is no reason to believe they aren't human, then it is reasonable to assume that said background figure is a human.
- That was point here, which also applies to metahumans. Atomic Skull certainly does not look human, he resembles his second Comics incarnation, which was a metahuman, so it's reasonable to assume he's metahuman too. We only need to clear up the definition of the word and decided if we can assume what their species is based on their looks and abilities ― like we do for humans. ― Thailog 12:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Rollback[]
Redemption, I'll ask you again to discuss first, instead of dictating. I did not remove the text on a whim. We have deleted articles [1] and reversed edits from this user in the past, because he ignores our messages and many requests for standards compliance. Moreover, this article was added during a block dodge.
Just slap a cleanup template on it. There are reasons why we have these things.
Yes, but a cleanup implies improvement of the article — not a complete rewrite, which is often the case with this individual.
It's better then nothing.
It's your opinion. We believe it's better "no article" than "terrible article". After all, they speak for this Wikia. And you can't expect someone to abide by our standards when they disregard our messages. ― Thailog 20:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)