Talk:Spectre (DC Comics character)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article Title[edit]

This page should be named The Spectre, with a redirect from Spectre (comics). The Spectre is the term under which this character is best known (much like The Flash), and the title his series are invariably named. So we should keep the definite article here. -mhr 16:44, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. This page is more about the Spectre the character rather than the specific series The Spectre, and one would not capitalize the definite article in running text. For example, quoting from the article, "Ostrander placed the Spectre in complex, ambiguous situations". —Lowellian (talk)
I disagree with Lowellian and agree with mhr. Covers and splash pages always name the character as "The Spectre," series in which the character stars are always titled "The Spectre," and whenever another character mentions him, he is called "the Spectre." It is never simply "Spectre." No, you would not capitalize the definite article in running text, but that doesn't change the fact that the definite article is always there. Check your example: "Ostrander placed the Spectre in complex, ambiguous situations." The character's name is "The Spectre" and the article should be retitled to match. Canonblack 20:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone want to mention his involvement in Kingdom Come?

I fully agree that the article SHOULD be entitled "The Spectre" rather than "Spectre." I don't see that the article being not capitalized in running text is evidence to the contrary, because it is usually there, and on the occasions it is not, its absence is jarring. Surely any fan of the character would agree with that. I tried to make the change, but it obviously requires someone with greater access than just one of us registered users. If an administrator is reading here, please take the appropriate action. Ted Watson 20:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following:
LSS: The Spectre is a title of a comic book, the Spectre is the comic book character. — J Greb 20:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either put the article on here or take it off the title of the entry on the pulp-novel/old-time-radio/comic-book/movie-serial/movie-feature character "The Shadow." One or the other. As it is you have blatant hypocrisy.Ted Watson 18:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two things:
  1. The above put this article in compliance with guidelines. Using an article that may or may not either follow or be subject to those guidelines is irrelevant. If The Shadow is miss-titled, then that should be addressed on that article's talk page. If it is felt that the guidelines are inappropriate, changes should be suggested on those talk pages.
  2. This is supposition but, it is quite likely that the two articles started at different points. This one starting as a character article, which the introduction still supports it as, and The Shadow starting as a radio program article that has migrated into a character article. If that is the case, then the article name should have been changed when the intro changed. (Side note: cf The Green Hornet. The article intro places it as about the radio series even though the article latter covers the character. Intent has a lot of bearing here.)
— J Greb 19:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are arguing semantic garbage. Citing a precedent is not an irrelevant act on this page--after faulting me for it, you turned right around and did it yourself, for Pete's sake!--and that WAS my purpose in bringing up the Shadow, as I most definitely do NOT think it should be changed. I stand by my making such a statement as being a proper act, and that was what you disputed, not the statement's validity on its own terms. The guidelines as you cite them say that the use of such an article is to be "avoided," which falls short of meaning NEVER used at all; the term simply is not that strong. I checked your link and was quite surprised by what I found: One example of "no article" was the country the Netherlands, while one with it was their capital, the Hague. Excuse me? As proper place names, these two are EXACTLY equal, neither ever being seen or used without its article, PERIOD, proving that the guidelines (or at least the explanatory page) were composed with less than respectable competency. The two examples cited from there, being places, do not ever get spoken to directly, which is the only context in which the Spectre, the Shadow, the Green Hornet, or, to cite another example given in the guidelines, the Punisher, are encountered without their articles (Oh, all right, newspaper headlines, too, but the papers toss all sorts of rules of proper English out the window in the interests of making the most of limited space--and not just in the headlines, either--so they don't help you). The definite article IS irrefutably part of those characters names, which is why it is part of the title of the radio series, comic book, movie, or whatever, so the distinction you attempted to draw there is non-existent. The real-world fact of the matter is that there are these instances where the usage is correct, in the sense of being factually accurate, and the general & arbitrary rules & regulations of the larger venue of presentation to the contrary are to be ignored, especially when, as I previously stated is the case here, said regs do not even categorically rule out such flexibility. As the old saying goes, "There is an exception to every rule" (to which I even add, "including THIS one!" as I remember being taught in high school that there was a conjugation rule of the Spanish language that had NO exceptions at all [it's been more than thirty-five years, so don't ask me to be specific!]). Think a bit before you post here again and try to be more realistic and reasonable. Ted Watson 20:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apology, first I should have been bluntly clear that The Green Hornet is an example of an article where the definite article is a part of the subjects name and is capitalized regardless of where the name falls in a sentence. I thought that was clear, evidently I was wrong. Second, it may not have been a good idea to take up a speculation as to why The Shadow isn't following convention. Maybe I should have been blunt there as well and suggest you ask yourself "Why does The Shadow appears to be an exception to the guidelines?" and "Does the same reasoning apply here?"
For what it's worth I've given my answer to the first question, and the second as well for that matter.
Next point, since you bring it up: Rules (or guidelines) and Exceptions. It probably isn't wise to tout out the axiom "There is an exception to every rule" right after demanding blind adherence to one such as:

Either put the article on here or take it off the title of the entry on the pulp-novel/old-time-radio/comic-book/movie-serial/movie-feature character "The Shadow." One or the other. As it is you have blatant hypocrisy.

Lastly, is there a valid reason inherent in to this article that its naming should be an exception to the 4 guideline links provided above? Bluntly, a simple "The (whatever) has it in the title so this one should too" doesn't cut it. That sounds to much like "The guidelines are just plain wrong." And that debate belongs on the MoS and guideline pages.
— J Greb 22:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have begun a discussion of changing the title of The Shadow at Talk:The Shadow#Title ("The"); hopefully this will satisfy the need for unifmority, as well as the need to address Wikipedia naming conventions. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Chris Griswold: I did not in any way shape or form intend to suggest that the title for the article on The Shadow should be changed. I maintain that it is correct as is, and I will most certainly be checking out, and probably joining, that discussion as well.

To J Greb: I was NOT "demanding blind adherence" to a rule, but quite the contrary: I pointed out a situation that is identical to the one under discussion but is being handled in opposite fashion, an indefensible contradiction in terms. I repeat and emphasize, IDENTICAL, and either both or neither are exceptions to the guidelines. Also, despite your claim otherwise, with the Green Hornet, the article is NOT capitalized in the middle of a sentence of running text any more or less than with the Spectre or the Shadow. Furthermore, it is looking more and more likely with each posting from you that English is at best your second language and your command of it is somewhat limited (you keep making the SAME mistakes of conjugation, number [dis]agreement, etc.). If so, then you are not qualified, in the most literal sense of that word, to be taking part in this discussion, as it deals with what is and is not proper usage in English, and one who is weak in this language has no business telling people who were born to and raised in it that he or she knows its rules better than they. If it IS your native tongue, then you really should learn to proofread better (meant sincerely and seriously; in MY proofreading, I sometimes find along with the occasional typo statements that are less than totally well taken, or even inaccurate, and I accordingly rewrite or delete them). Ted Watson 21:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, re-read all of your statements here and then try to follow along.
  • "I did not in any way shape or form intend to suggest that the title for the article on The Shadow should be changed." (21:06, Feb 28, 2007)
  • "Either put the article on here or take it off the title of the entry on the pulp-novel/old-time-radio/comic-book/movie-serial/movie-feature character 'The Shadow.'" (18:45, Feb 27, 2007)
You may not have intended or wanted to suggest that the other article should be changed, but you choice or wording did so blatantly and explicitly.
  • "I was NOT 'demanding blind adherence' to a rule..." (21:06, Feb 28, 2007)
Ok, I am really having trouble with you semantics here. Exactly how is a call of "One or the other." not a demand to adhere to a rule without exception.
  • "I pointed out a situation that is identical to the one under discussion but is being handled in opposite fashion, an indefensible contradiction in terms."
Um... no. You pointed out an apparently identical situation and did not stop to ask why the different criteria were applied. I pointed it out earlier (19:02, Feb 27, 2007 ) and I'll do so again:
  • Both articles are about a fictional character. That is crystal clear in the current lead sections.
  • Both characters have names that, when the character is talked about, include "the".
  • One of the characters started out in a self titled publication then saw success in a self title radio show as well as self titled films. The other took almost 30 years to see a self-titled publication.
  • An inference can be made that one article has changed its focus and had the lead changed accordingly without' the article title being changed.
At that point, it is a topic to be taken up on the talk page of that article.
With regard to the article The Green Hornet, may I suggest you go back and re-read the lead for that article and the guidelines. The lead is explicit, the article is supposed to be primarily about the radio show "The Green Hornet" not the character "the Green Hornet". That makes that article substantially different from this one and closer to the inferred starting point for The Shadow. And if you are going to bring up that The Green Hornet is more about the character(s) that the original show, then it is again an issue that needs be addressed on that articles talk page, both content and title, not here.
— J Greb 22:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done with you, Greb. There's no reasoning with you. Bye. Ted Watson 18:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what happened to it, but within three hours of posting the above, I added a second posting in which I apologized for neglecting to note that your earlier errors of grammar and such that the constant consistency of which had suggested that English was your second and limited language, disqualifying you from this debate, were not present in that last posting and therefore were not indicative of weak command of the language. Presumably, I did something wrong in the posting process, except that I checked this thread for further activity on the intervening day and didn't notice my note's absence then, and can't see how I could fail to notice when, as I said, the idea was to check this very thread. Whatever happened with that, it is nothing but proper behavior on my part to note the situation (besides, I also admit to realizing I did a poor job the first time anyway, and welcome the opportunity to correct it). Ted Watson 18:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming (November, 2004) events[edit]

Someone who is actively following the comics needs to remember to update this entry after the upcoming return of Hal Jordan as Green Lantern series.

Books of Magic[edit]

Spectre is related to Raguel god of vengeance in books of magic. He is one of the Archangels.

--69.255.16.162 21:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotham Central[edit]

I would add the Kingdom Come involvement if I had the time. Are you guys aware of the crooked forensic cop in Gotham Central also named Jim Corrigan? Who also bears a resemblance to our dear avenging spirit? According to the previews, there is going to be a Day of Vengeance tie in in the comic and shortly before the conclusion of Day of Vengeance apparently he is going to be finally hunted down. Will he be the new Spectre? Was he always?

The comic drops subtle clues from time to time such as... the smoke from his cigarrette regularly forming a "S" and him mentioning that a part of him died. I'll go back in my issues, although I think it's too much work for something that is going to wrap up in just a few months.

The Spectre's powers[edit]

I'm thinking of adding a list of The Spectre's powers because I feel "divine mystical enhancements granting near omnipotent abilities" is too vague. From what I've seen and read, The Spectre's powers include intangiblity, flight, invisibility, the ability to inhabit and animate inanimate objects, the ability to sense the intentions of people in the place where they plan to carry those intentions out, the ability to absorb magic, the ability to change size, the ability to transform matter, knowledge of many secrets of the universe and its inhabitants, and, sometimes, the power to glimpse into the future. Did I miss anything?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Evernut (talk • contribs)

I like the current definition. It's intentionaly vague, which seems to fit into his range of abilities. And he can do a few more things, such as travel interdimensionally (trips to Earth-2 to Earth-1), split into multiple, concurrent versions of himself, access dimensions adjacent to the afterlife (but cannot go to his eternal reward yet), superhuman strength, prevent planets from colliding, fire very powerful energy (or force) bolts, etc ...

In his case, it would be meaningful to list his limitations, such as:

  • Complience to "The Presence"
  • Cannot create life from nothingness (has to use the "Ring of Life" and, even then, must ask for permission)
  • Vulnerable to the Spear of Destiny
    • He used to be forced to bond w/ a person in order to operate on the Earth's plane. How he managed to operate w/o bonding w/ a human during the "Day of Vengence" storyline has yet to be explained.

AlGorup 15:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input! I also remembered that he can merge with other beings (I saw an issue where the Hal Jordan Spectre was merging with the JLA members one by one to help them defeat some sort of alien creatures they were fighting). How about if I left the current definition in the stastics box, but added a section which began with, "The Spectre has divine mystical enhancments granting near omnipotent abilities. These include, but are not limited to, . . . " and then listed the powers and limtations we've just listed? Would that be all right?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Evernut (talk • contribs)

I would keep it as is. If you wanted to edit it, I would suggest "Divine mystical enhancments, whose scope ranges from the dictates of the Presence". Otherwise, if you get too specific, you'll either have to mention each & every power as seen from every comic that the Spectre appeared. That would be a very long list and under constant revision, as his capabilities have changed quite a bit over the decades that he was published. If I would guess, I predict that his current power level will again be limited by his recents actions in the Day of Vengence.

AlGorup 22:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have an excellent point. I'll leave it as it is.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Evernut (talk • contribs)

I actually edited the list to "Divine mystical enhancements, whose TRUE scope ranges from the dictates of the Presence" because it's more than vague enough, AND it more accurately presents what's going on. I mean, there have been at least a couple of instances where he was granted virtual omniscience as well as omnipotence by the Presence to deal with certain threats and situations. Additionally, the statement is vague enough to deal with the fluxuations (inconsistencies?) of power that we've seen throughout his "career." ShotokanNbjj 20:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)ShotokanNbjj[reply]

Recent issues such as his fear of the emotional entities and his defeats at the hands of libra, and the spirit king. As well as his inability to affect beings without souls should be addressed. These show he is not omnipotent, omniscience or omnipresent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.226.229 (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, your work won't last long at all. See the lower thread, "'Most powerful being'" for the explanation. --Tbrittreid (talk) 19:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Told you so. --Tbrittreid (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

According to Kelly Martin: "A cover image should only be used to illustrate an article about that issue. Do not use a full cover image to illustrate an article about a character." [1]
—Lesfer (talk/@) 03:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean Kelly is right, though. Hiding The wikipedian meme 20:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And here I am to apologize for assuming Kelly's statement was definitive. My mistake, sorry guys. DrBat, if you think the JSA cover image fits as a better illustration for the SHB than the current one, feel free to change it back. Regards and once again, sorry for my mistake. —Lesfer (talk/@) 20:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive Links[edit]

This article has way too many links to unrelated items. For example, in the Modern Age Version section, I cannot see how links to Wrongful conviction, New York State, Atonement and the 1920s articles in Wikipedia are of any benefit to the readers of this article. The link to ethnic cleansing could be useful if it is a term that a reader is not familiar with, but the others are a bit overkill. Unless someone has a specific concern with keeping them in because they provide some information relevant to the article, I will remove them within the next month, to give everyone a chance to review and decide. Slavlin 22:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had noticed some of those when I made a pass through looking at the grammar and formatting. I took out a lot of redundant links in the main body, but left those as either 1) a redirect someone though important for additional background, or 2) a redirect for a word/phrase that was felt to be uncommon. As such I wasn't sure if they should be trimmed or not.
Given that the years are inconsistent, some decades linked, some note, I doubt there is a good reason to have those links.
As for the rest... it might be worthwhile to list the non-comic book industry & character links to see the feed back on which are reasonable and which are fluff. — J Greb 23:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment[edit]

Needs references to move up a grade. Hiding Talk 09:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Publication history[edit]

This article is in desperate need of Publication history. The lack is very apparent in the 1960's paragraph of the Silver Age section, when it's not even mentioned where the character was revived. CovenantD 07:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References to Ghost Rider and Amalgam[edit]

I would like to request that whoever keeps removing this information STOP doing so. This information is accurate, and as Amalgam ties the two characters together, it is worth noting. If possible, I would like to request that somebody remove the ability to remove this section from the Spectre, as it is annoying to see information which is valid and which has further information about the Spectre, or an alternate version thereof, removed and having to constantly restore it.

Warwolf 19:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amalgam tied many characters together, such as Dr. Doom and Doomsday, Green Lantern and Iron Man, and others who were very little alike. The Spectre is omnipotent, while Ghost Rider is not. Spectre is a servant of God's wrath, GR is demon-possessed biker. Spectre oversees the DC multiverse and passes judgement on those he deems worthy of punishment. That makes him more like Marvel's Living Tribunal, who has been compared to the Spectre and even aided the Spectre during Amalgam Comics. BWANASIMBA 23:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few other points:
  • Since the Amalgam "Speed Demon" characters are melds of three Flashes, Etragin, and two Ghost Rider, there is very little reason to include them in an article dealing with the Spectre. As such they should be kept to those articles.
  • The "Night Spectre" character is, at best, an alternate, or "other", version. And at best, it deserves a minimal notation in this article. Personal prefernace would be something akin to the section in the Martian Manhunter. Like this:
The character won the ''1961 Alley Award as the Hero/Heroine Most Worthy of Revival'' and
the ''1964 Alley Award for Strip Most Desired for Revival''.

==Analogues==
*'''[[Living Tribunal]]''': The personification of comic balance in Mavel Comics universe.
*'''Night Spectre''': An combination character from ''[[Speed Demon (comics)|Speed Demon]]'',
part of the [[Amalgam Comics]] project joint published by DC and Marvel.

==Awards==
  • The section equating Spectre and the Ghost Rider comes off as "fan specualtaion" unless it has citations explicetly mentioning that: 1) The Johnny Blaze character was created to echo the Spectre; 2) The Daniel Ketch character was created to echo the Spectre; 3) Writers deleberatly moved one character to more closely mirror the other; and/or 4) the title "Spirit of Vengeance" was appled to one character to under cut or tie to the other.
Thanks for listening — J Greb 23:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amalgam was a brief cross-company fling that is totally out of continuity and should be ignored for the purposes of a concise encyclopedia article on a single character, as are the mid-to-late 1960s DC-based Saturday morning cartoons from Filmation (although as an adaptation to another medium these deserve a brief acknowledgement of their existence, I admit, but Amalgam does not even rate that here). Brainiac was depicted as an army of robots built by one Dr. Heckla (spelling a guess) rather than the sentient humanoid computer who passed for a living being for several years in the comics, for one example. Another is the design changes in the costumes of the Atom and Kid Flash, particularly the inexplicable color reversal of the latter. I repeat, it is out of continuity and not worth going into here. Ted Watson 20:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Earth-Prime[edit]

However, though some have accordingly speculated that this run of the Spectre took place on Earth-1, Justice League of American#220 states that the Spectre had bonded with the counterparts of Jim Corrigan on alternate Earths, and the Justice League of American Index#3 entry for JLA#83 further supports this reasoning. Not only that, but the reference to "are you really Superman?" can be taken as a wry remark about the number of times Clark Kent has been "mistakenly" suspected of being Superman, a situation that was even the subject of jokes on Earth-1's late night talk shows, pace Action Comics#474, published in 1977. Enda80 (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Enda80[reply]

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required[edit]

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C-Class rated for Comics Project[edit]

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Most powerful being"[edit]

There's been an edit war with the following two statements in Powers and abilities going back and forth:

The Spectre is one of the most powerful known beings in the DC Universe.... (the version favored by myself and some others)

The Spectre is the most powerful known being in.... (the version favored by some editors, mostly if not entirely anonymous IPs)

To repeat and use the space here to expand/clarify my original edit summary to this: "Zor (More Fun Comics #s 55 & 57, 1940) and Shaithan (Showcase #61, 1966)—to name just two off the top of my head—each fought the Spectre to a standstill, so categorically stating that he is the most powerful being in the DC Universe, i.e. with no peers, is inaccurate. Please leave this alone. --Tbrittreid (talk) 23:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, an IP has now changed this to, "...the most powerful superhero in the DC Universe." Fair enough! --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In MFC #s 55 & 57 Zor is explicitly depicted as more powerful than the Spectre. Furthermore, Spec's powers were reduced for the last two years of that run, admittedly raised to a previously unseen level in Showcase #60 (1966), reduced again in Spectre (1967 series) #s 8–10, brought back up somewhat but not to 1966 level in Adventure Comics #s 431–440, even higher in JLA shortly thereafter, plus in appearances in the briefly revived Showcase, in DC Comics Presents and in Swamp Thing Annual #2, then reduced in his 1987-launched book (Doug Moench writing), and back up to near 1966 level in John Ostrander's version. They varied, not simply increased. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In preparation for the "third party opinion" I am about to request, I need to point out the following facts. One other person, an unregistered IP who therefore has no genuine talk page of his own and declines to discuss the matter here, or even to make an edit summary in his editing, is the other person involved, but is consequently not reflected here. The IP number is, as of this writing, 70.115.56.65, but has in the past month (specifically, since November 6) been 70.115.57.219, 70.115.56.27 and maybe 72.178.148.160. On his most recent edit, a significant amouint of material that contradicted his preferred position about the powers (only) vastly increasing over the years was deleted. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's add 71.41.26.154, 70.115.57.5 and 72.27.60.39 to the list, to keep the record up to date. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
71.252.138.143 here. As I said when I edited the page before, the fact that he requires the Ring of Life to perform feats beyond what he is normally capable of contradicts the assertion that he is the most powerful being to exist. I am not familiar with what exactly the RoL is, not having read most of Spectre's books, but assuming it is the White Lantern Ring that appeared at the end of the Blackest Night event, does this not suggest that the Entity, embodiment of all life is more powerful than Spectre? U8t9034g (talk) 21:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Response to third opinion request ( Disagreement on whether the Spectre (comic book character) is the most powerful being in the universe with powers that increased vastly over the years or the most powerful superhero in the DC universe with powers that varied greatly over the years. 22:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC) ):
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Spectre (comics) and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

Statements of opinion, unsupported by reference constitute original research and fail verification from a reliable source reference. Users would be well within the scope of those policies and guidelines to remove said type of content. Statements of opinion, supported by a reliable source reference, should be attributed to the individual or organization which is making the opinion.—RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thanks for nothing. Didn't you see my sources here against the other editor's version? And what about "increased" versus "varied," where again I gave sources? What do you want, no "Powers and abilities" section at all? --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Is he really the most powerful being (what about Anti-Monitor, Mr. Mxyzptlk, etc)? --Stevehim (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JLA #220[edit]

Anonymous IP 114.74.143.242 is relentless in misrepresenting the situation in Justice League of America #220's end scene. With the Justice Society member–Spectre in the scene, Doctor Fate produces, in his words, a "Jim Corrigan body...purely of Earth One. His Spectre persona is trapped within." [emphasis added] That absolutely is two Spectres as well as two Corrigans. Now ever since reading Cary Burkett's 1977 article in The Amazing World of DC Comics (cited in the article), I've liked the theory of there being only one Spectre who travelled to various Earths as much as any fan, but this scene is in contradiction to it. And in any event, your wanting to keep that out doesn't justify removing the statement that Corrigan's referring to Earl Crawford as "mild-mannered reporter" is inconsistent with the offered theory that the Michael Fleisher/Jim Aparo/Adventure Comics run takes place on Earth One, where the existence of that famous tagline as such is not plausible. I'll rephrase things a bit to clarify the lack of a direct connection. --Tbrittreid (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not misrepresenting what happened in Justice Leage America 220. Have you read the issue? I ask because what you stated above does not happen and is a misrepresentation of the issue. In the issue it is Sargon the Sorcerer who brings Jim Corrigans body, not Doctor Fate. Here is what He says: "Right now I've one last expatriate from earth two to show you...One I brought to this rooftop for safe keeping. You know Him as the Spectre, Flash. One who walks the corridors of many a cosmos, struck down by the Thunderbolt because this particular Jim Corrigan body, at least is purely of earth one* His Spectre persona is traped within this mortal shell." When He says this Powergirl, Flash, Huntress and Red Tornado are there and there is no JSA Spectre in the scene. So it is you who is minrepresenting the situation in JLA 220. Here is a link tht shows the issue. http://www.htmlcomics.com/Book/html.asp?Series_Name=Justice%20League%20of%20America%20(V1)&Book_No=220&Page_Number=8&Alpha=J&Lookup= Later in the issue the Spectre appears and says "Once the spell on Jim Corrigan was lifted, it took me but a monment to bring the man of steel here." This clearly shows that the Spectre at the end was the one that was traped in Jim Corrigan at the start of the issue and as other stories show, the Spectre used both earth 1 and earth 2 Jim Corrigan. So like I said asked before, have you read ht issue because what you claimed happened in the comic is not there. Also the Spectre never appears with Jim Corrigan when His Spectre persona in traped within so you claim that it shows two Spectres does not happen in the issue. Also when Sargon the Sorcerer says: "this particular Jim Corrigan body, at least is purely of earth one, there is a note at the lower left hand corner of the box which says "See upcoming JSA miniseries by Thomas and Ordway for details. In the America vs the Justice Society miniseries, issue two, after the Spectre leaves the court room in the boxs it says " Then it seems as if a different universe opens up beneath the feet of the one who has been Jim Corrigan on at least two earths and the Spectre is seen no more among men." So this shows while there is one Spectre he has used both Jim Corrigan from earth 1 and earth 2 and that there is not many Spectres. As for what Jim Corrigan said to Earl Crawford, it is reading too much into it. That one line does not make there more then one Spectre. If you want to show there is more then one Spectre you would have to show which comic shows this, say it or where DC has said there was more then one Spectre. As I pinted out in WHOS WHO it only mentions one Spectre and never say there was more then one. And since there has not been shown a comic with two Spectres appear in , it is a huge streach to say that Jim's statment to Ed means that there is more then one Spectre. We could just as well say Jim is breaking the forth wall. Also in Adventure comics 437, when the Spectre is melting the bombs, it says "There are heroes who fight crime with magic Rings or with the powers they have brought with them from distant planets. But all these pale into insignificance besides the astral awesomeness of the Spectre." That is a reference to Green Lantern and Superman, showing that they existed, so this can be earth one. Also to add more evidence to this is Illustrated index: All Star Comics. In the entry for the Spectre it says this: Soon afterwards the Spectre's essense was dissipated for a time, after he stopped earth 1 and earth 2 from colliding. He eventually reformed his spirit body and found a new host in the Jim Corrigan of earth 1. His time with the Jorunal of Judgement seemed to have done him little good for the Spectre was soon slaughtering criminals in imaginative ways at every turn". So this once again show that there was one Spectre who used both bodies of Jim Corrigan and it also shows that it was the JSA Spectre who was killing people in Adventure coimics.114.74.145.234 (talk) 04:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
O.K., it was Sargon instead of Fate and the Spectre who appeared in the story was the one trapped inside the Earth One Corrigan. But, Sargon's saying, "His Spectre persona is trapped within" instead of "The Spectre is..." indicates that this Spectre is not the JSA member the Earth Two natives there all know (and the fact that I got the quote right should tell you that I have read the comic, but it has admittedly been some years ago; all I still possess physically was a note I made about the Spectre, a personal favorite of mine). But never mind that. The point under discussion in that part of the article is not how many Spectres there are, but just where in the DC Multiverse the Adventure/Fleisher–Aparo Spectre stories took place. Jim's referring to Earl not just as Clark Kent but as "mild mannered reporter" does work against Earth One or any Earth where Superman is "real" and Clark Kent is his secret civilian identity; that was what was meant by that sentence and it definitely could have been clearer. I freely admit that my bringing up JLA #220 here in the first place (and I also freely admit that it was me who did so) was irrelevant, and as erroneous as my memory of that story's specifics. Mistakes for which I apologize, as I do for my misrepresentation of your actions/motives, a failure to "assume good faith" on my part. The fact remains that the subject at hand is the location of that short run of Spectre stories, not how many Spectres there may or may not have been; indeed, the Burkett article that first theorized it was Earth Prime was dedicated to the contention of only one Spectre. I'll wait for a reply from you here before I alter the passage accordingly. --Tbrittreid (talk) 21:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Sargon saying that shows that it was not the Spectre everyone knew. In the story itself there is no indication that anyone believes that the Spectre is an earth 1 version instead of the Spectre from the JSA. And as I pointed out before, in the comic there was a box when Sargon was taking saying that a miniseries by Thomas would explain this and the America vs JS does say that the Spectre had been Jim Corrigan on at least to earths. But yes the issue at hand is the Fleisher–Aparo Spectre stories and where they took place. Like I said before, I think it is reading too much into Jim calling Earl '"clark kent mild manner reporter meaning that it takes place on earh prime or a earth where Superman is not real. As I brought up before in Adventure comics 437, when the Spectre is melting the bombs, it says "There are heroes who fight crime with magic Rings or with the powers they have brought with them from distant planets. But all these pale into insignificance besides the astral awesomeness of the Spectre." That is a reference to Green Lantern and Superman, showing that they existed on this earth so this can be earth one. Also Illustrated index: All Star Comics #1 it creadits the JSA Spectre with the killings in Adventure comics. So by looking at these two things it shows that the stories happened on earth 1. I think saying that what Jim said to Earl shows that it is on a world which Superman is not real is reading too much into it as other writers (like Illustrated index: All Star Comics) never came to that conclusion and I have neve seen where DC said that it took place on earth Prime or a earth where Superman is not real. If you think what Jim said to Earl should be in the article then I think what is said in Adventure Comics 437 and Illustrated index: All Star Comics #1 should be in it as well.114.74.252.161 (talk) 03:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The source cited in the article, Cary Burkett's essay in the DC-published Amazing World of DC Comics, allows no alternative interpretation of the references to Crawford, and also qualifies as someplace "where DC said it took place on Earth Prime or an Earth where Superman is not real." Your quote from #437 (and again I apologize, for having missed your first citing of it) is in one of the captions, which throughout this series are written in a completely objective perspective and this one could easily take the entire DC Multiverse into account. As for this index you mention (I've never heard of it myself, but I'm not doubting its existence) crediting the Adventure killings to the JSA Spectre, so does Burkett. As I said before, his article is dedicated to the concept of only one Spectre travelling among various parallel Earths/space-time continuums, and he includes both Earth Two (home of the JSA & birthplace of the Spectre) and Earth Prime (theorized location of these stories). Neither contradicts the interpretation (inescapable, both Burkett and I feel) of "Clark Kent, mild mannered reporter"/"Gee, are you really Superman?" Now that I understand where you were coming from, this has been an interesting discussion. --Tbrittreid (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the long delay, I have been busy and have not had time to reply to this discussion. Would you be able to post what Cary Burkett said in Amazing World of DC Comics. Did He say that that references to Crawford means that it took place on earth prime or a earth where Superman is not real or does He say that it is likey that it take polace on earth prime or and earth where Superman is not real. If it is the latter then I would say that then DC never did offficaly say that it happened on Earth Prime or an Earth where Superman is not real. As for what I brought up about the one of the captions in Adventures 437 I think it shows that the story takes place on a earth where Superman and Green Lantern exist. Seeing as we have different interpretations about the caption I think it should be in the article and both interpretations for what it means as well. In regards to the index I quoted, I wasn't saying that it disagress with Burkett in that it was the JSA Spectre that did that killings, but that it places the killings on earth 1. It says "He (Spectre) eventually reformed his spirit body and found a new host in the Jim Corrigan of earth 1. His time with the Jorunal of Judgement seemed to have done him little good for the Spectre was soon slaughtering criminals in imaginative ways at every turn." It seems from reading it, that after the Spectre found a new host in Jim Corrign of earth 1, that was when he started to do the killings. It doesn't say that after the Spectre found a new host in the Jim Corrigan of earth 1 that He went to another earth and slaughtered criminals in imaginative ways at every turn. So I think in the article it should inculde that the Spectre after stoping earth 1 and 2 from colliding went to earth 1, that there is disagreement from things published from as to where the adventure comics stories took place. I will wait for you reply.114.74.156.2 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cary Burkett in "Speculations on The Spectre!" Amazing World of DC Comics, #16, December 1977, pp.38–41, specifically on p. 41, column 2, first full paragraph, first sentence onwards: "Adventure #435 gives us a clue as to where these exploits take place. In this story everyone seems to know Superman's secret identity is Clark Kent. This eliminates Earths I and II as the location and points to a third earth [sic] ... Earth Prime, where there are no real super-heroes, only comic books which publish 'fictional' accounts of such heroes as Superman, Batman, Flash and others [Boldface usage in the original]." Burkett just doesn't allow that there's any other way of interpreting that scene. There is something else: Despite providing a genuine quote from #437, you do not appear to have read these stories, as there is no Jim Corrigan "host" here, no living flesh-&-blood body thereof, but the Spectre merely pretends that Corrigan is alive, makes himself visible in Jim's appearance (this is quite important in Jim's relationship with heiress Gwen Sterling, and absolutely crucial to the two-part story in #s 439-440). As we both already know, JLA #220 presents a host-body Corrigan of Earth 1, but The Brave and the Bold #75 (December 1967–January 1968) and B&B #199 (June 1983) do as well. B&B #180 (November 1981) is quite unclear as to the Spec/Jim relationship, while B&B #116 (December 1974–January 1975), published during the Adventure run, seems to depict the same situation as in those stories. However, on close examination it appears that Bob Haney wrote it otherwise, and Aparo, regular artist here as well on Adventure, just drew it that way. On pg. 9, panel 1, Corrigan says, "How can I tell [Gotham City Police Commissioner] Gordon The Spectre overdid it, and destroyed the evidence!?" He clearly refers to Spectre as a separate entity beyond his control there, and the three "on stage" transitions could well have been intended by Haney for Spec to be emerging from and returning to Corrigan's body, but editor Murray Boltinoff (or perhaps his assistant, Paul Levitz, who was working in the same capacity for AC editor Joe Orlando simultaneously) told him to draw it to match Spectre's own series. Bottom line: The Adventure run does not involve a host body of Jim Corrigan, inconsistent with Earth 1. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you've been too busy to reply (again) or do indeed concede by silence as I had incorrectly assumed before, but I've found two more comments about where the Adventure/Fleisher-Aparo Spectre stories take place, both in the comic's letter columns. First, in #431 (also with the initial Spectre story), Jim True wrote, "I hear that the Spectre is returning in Adventure #431. Please remember that the Spectre died in JLA a few years ago [the entire letter as published]." The editorial reply, also in full: "I'll give you your choice of the two explanations floating around the office. Writer Mike Fleisher prefers the version that says 'Denny O'Neil killed him and stuck him in that crypt—let him get him out!' A more logical version is that these are adventures that the Spectre was involved in before he was imprisoned." Of course, in JLA #83 O'Neil did get Spectre out of that crypt right there, and then killed him. Both the editor and the writer are clearly unfamiliar with that story's details. Also, Orlando's suggestion isn't actually any more logical, as with Clarice Whitney in the 1940s and Mona Marcy in the 1960s (see here for details about her), there's just no room for Gwen Sterling during Corrigan's past Spectre careers, to say nothing of the New York locale here being incompatible with Cliffland and Gateway City of those two earlier eras. Now on to #434: John Leasun wrote (among other things not really elaborating on this point), "So many changes have been made in the Spectre that the character is very confusing." The editorial reply: "After long and careful thought, we've come up with an explanation for all the Spectre variations: we are now writing about the Earth-One Spectre, not the Earth-Two Spectre who [sic] you're more familiar with." IIRC, Burkett acknowledged and dismissed this statement. Besides, as you and I have agreed, the general consensus at DC seems to be that there has been one Spectre travelling around multiple Earths and (sometimes) possessing the local Corrigan. And like I documented, there's no Jim Corrigan host body in these stories, but there certainly was one on Earth-1 before and after this run. Oh, let me 'fess up for the record: I fully believe that the yellow field on Batman's chest emblem in B&B #75 should be regarded as an artist's error, this is actually the Earth-2 Bats, and that's where the story occurs, hence its flesh-and-blood Corrigan. Note that in that story Batman is making a ceremonial personal appearance in Gotham City's Chinatown as part of the Chinese New Year/Year of the Bat celebration, when something goes unexpectedly wrong; quite consistent with the Earth 2 Bats's "semi-retirement" reported by his adult Robin just a few months earlier in that year's JLA/JSA crossover. --Tbrittreid (talk) 23:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Twenty-four (or so) hours from now, I'll assume "silence brings assent" and change the passage to remove discussion of "one Spectre or more" and restore "mild mannered reporter" as working against the Earth 1 jokes from Clark being suspected. --Tbrittreid (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Age Powers?[edit]

What were the Spectre's powers during the Golden Age of Comics? -13:59, 19 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.5.173 (talk)

In Other Media: DC Showcase[edit]

It the Spectre short included in the Superman / Shazaom: The Return of Black Adam the same short that was originally included with Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths? --RedKnight (talk) 18:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's supposed to be a few minutes longer, but I haven't seen it so I don't know what was added.-5- (talk) 19:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Spectre (character). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 May 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 02:25, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Spectre (character) → Spectre (DC Comics character) – The current page title is ambiguous due to a large roster of other characters named that on the disambig page at Spectre. Per WP:INCDAB, after fixing links, Spectre (character) should redirect to the disambig page. -- Netoholic @ 05:50, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support - There are notable characters from other media with this name. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:50, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Enemies[edit]

Finding a rogues gallery list of Spectre enemies is quite rare on the internet. I would much appreciate it if someone could aid me in constructing a list of Spectre foes to add to his page. Canadian Lycanthrope (talk) 01:09, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t forget the Constantine Show[edit]

About the Spectre… other appearances, one is in the Constantine show where he goes to Louisiana, and solves a murder and ghost mystery with Jim Corrigan. 2600:1012:B184:C24E:8D69:969F:F0BB:9CD7 (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spectre_(DC_Comics_character)&oldid=1208722657"