Talk:Bill Finger

Untitled

I'm detecting a problem with the wording of this article, and I'm not sure how serious it is. Credited at the bottom is the Gerard Jones book as a reference, but the actual wording of the text is a very close parallel (I hesitate to say "verbatim plagiarism", but that is the idea influencing me as I type this) to an article written by Bulent Yusuf on the Ninth Art website (http://www.ninthart.com). The article itself is here, http://www.ninthart.com/display.php?article=1113 and begins about halfway down the page. Although the text is not a verbatim duplicate, the phrasing, order of ideas, and even objects presented as examples or lists are almost too similar to be coincidence.

Here are a few key passages:

• In the comic book industry, being "Fingered" is slang for being denied credit for one's contributions to a story or character.

• In 1939, the popularity of Superman in Action Comics led the comic book division of National Publications (later DC comics) to seek and develop more superheroes for publication. Artist Bob Kane created a character named "Birdman", and showed sketches of his designs to Bill Finger, a writer with whom he was a regular collaborator. Finger suggested renaming the character "Batman", replacing the domino mask and wings with a cape and cowl, giving him gloves, and removing sections of the original costume that were bright red. Finger then wrote the first BATMAN story, whilst Kane provided the art. However, because Kane had already submitted a proposal for a Batman character to DC, he was the only person given official credit for its creation.

• Finger wrote most of the early stories and, amongst other things, created Bruce Wayne, Robin, the Batcave, the Batmobile, and Gotham City. In addition, these stories were distinctive for their use of giant-size props like giant pennies, typewriters or sewing machines.

Unless Bulent Yusuf wrote the Wikipedia article, this looks a little too much like his source material. I have not read the Jones book, so I cannot argue whether or not Yusuf "borrowed" from it to write his Ninth Art article, but considering that Yusuf is a professional writer and Ninth Art's position on intellectual property rights, I would seriously doubt it.

I think this article needs to be extensively rewritten, including additional sources and proper credit for all reference materials. Canonblack 14:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Name Controversey

I added some stuff to the second paragraph (in addition to rewording what appeared to be plagarism) about how there's still a controversey over whether or not Kane came up with the idea for the name "Batman" (which he may have, especially considering his horror movie influence) as well as details about the costume. I'm not saying Finger didn't do what they say he did, but there's still a question.

The article left out any details of other important Finger-characters: The Green Lantern and Lori Lemaris. I elaborated on them.

Epiphone83 00:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)User: Epiphone83 There is no "controversy" concerning the name of the character and who came up with it. Finger's account is there for all to see. The accusation of this "Birdman" scenario and Kane's "stealing" Bill's credit was made by a writer who provided no sources to support his accusation. I could write a book and claim Clayton Moore "really" created The Lone Ranger but that wouldn't make it true, not by a long shot. Bill didn't sign up to be Kane's partner, he signed up to be his ghost writer. That's why Kane went to Sullivan "...without Bill".MARK VENTURE (talk) 06:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Credit, Ownership and Freelancing in Comicville

Personally, I have failed to understand why journey-man (or freelance) artists or writers who work in the comic book industry ( or who have in the past) feel they are entitled to special treatment not afforded to their peers who work in other industries. Bill Finger, who did not start off as a professional writer but was almost "drafted" by Bob Kane, never really complained about owning any part of Batman, but was distressed over not getting a byline for his writing, which he felt he deserved. (Although, Bob Kane claimed in his auto-bio that Finger never asked him for one.)If Finger had chosen to be a true professional writer, he would have learned that in comics, very few writers received a byline and the same was true for several artists, inkers, letterers,etc. He probably learned this eventually, but many of his supporters seem to suffer from "selective amnesia" whenever they discuss him and his relationship with Bob Kane.

In other fields, "ghost writers" or "artists" accept the fact they may not receive a byline and sometimes are even "stiffed" on payment! They look at these incidents as "paying one's dues" on their way to fulfilling their respective careers goals. In terms of ownership for their contributions along the way, again, they understand that if they are working for a "company" or "studio" that is not their own, ownership of "their" creations is out of the question and royalties, a pipe dream, although they could negotiate for such, if desired.

The artists who worked or created characters for the Walt Disney or Warner Bros. animation studios knew they did not own any of these characters. That's why, instead of complaining about this fact, they fought for things like fair wages, pensions and medical benefits. Those who work for comic book companies should do likewise.

Bob Kane and William Marston (the creator of Wonder Woman) were shrewd enough to set up their own studios which negotiated with the publisher (in their case, DC COMICS) concerning part ownership of their creations. This is the standard relationship in Europe and Japan. If someone doesn't want to follow their lead, this is fine, but critics of these men (and others)shouldn't engage in smear tactics in the name of "justice" for any of their respective employees.

-The Batmaniac-

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.236.252.234 (talk) 20:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC).

No one disagrees that it was fair to not include the credit back in the 1930s. It was only procedure. However, seeing as how the franchise escalated from a simple recurring character on DC Comics to an iconic world-famous symbol within a decade or two, it's only proper justice that Finger's efforts be noted. After all, if left to Kane, he would have created "Bird-Man". Had Kane gone along by himself, he would have been nowhere. Finger laid the foundations and he should be credited. We should try not to be POV, yes but then this is a factual and logical conclusion. Zuracech lordum 23:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand your righteous anger, and don't disagree that by modern standards he should have been credited. But conclusions are disallowed under Wiki guidelines. For the sake of argument, for instance, a DC attorney might state that there was a long history of uncredited ghost writers long before Kane and Batman, which would be an equally factual and logical conclusion. We can't conclude -- all we can do is state the confirmable, verifiable facts. --Tenebrae 02:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well said. Doczilla 04:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

True. If we don't do that, then wikipedia will never be accepted with the rest of the world. Doesn't make me any more happier about the injustice. I'm considering rewriting this article as it does seem to be plagiarised and POV. Any suggestions or is it good enough already? Zuracech lordum 04:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Doc, and hi, Zuracech. Well, if there's plagiarism, then it's simple: We need to put a copyvio (copyright violation) template on it, with the URL of the page from it was ostensibly copied. Otherwise, I'm really not sure that a total rewrite is needed to eliminate any POV; the language overall seems neutral and there seem to be a lot of footnotes from such sources as the Bob Kane book and the Steranko History of Comics, as well as references include the Gerard Jones book. This suggests to me the article might need judicious editing and cite-requests, as opposed to complete overhaul. --Tenebrae 02:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it doesn't seem like plagiarism. It might be that the writer from the website may have used the same books to obtain his material from. It seems to follow a NPOV. Editing and cite-requests are enough. I don't think it warrants a copyvio template. Zuracech lordum 06:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

I'm giving it a shot at cleaning up. I don't like what I did with the 'sections', but I tried to streamline the parenthetical comments to a degree. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

CREDIT REDUX

It was wonderful to find that my comments had (finally) generated a civil discussion on the matter of BATMAN and his creators. However, I noticed that two matters still need clarifying: 1. I think some of us need to re-read that abysmal tome "MEN OF TWOMORROW". While it is indeed a rousing, juicy piece of gossip, it falls far short as a document of "history". Take,for example, this "Bird Man" issue (among many). While it is true that Mr.Kane did create such a character, it was still before Mr. Bill Finger got involved with the project. It was one of many that Kane toyed with and he mentioned it in his autobio in the context of a particular drawing. In "...Twomorrow" the author called the drawing a fake. However, in a page taken from the logic of CHRISSY SNOW, the author then uses the same drawing to support his "bird man" argument! The missing item I noticed was HIS citation! What is his source? Where is the footnote? Where is his quote by Finger that said Batman was his idea? I don't think Mr. Jones did that by accident but that is my theory and it's for another place.

2.In the matter of my piece about "credit", let me take Misters Kane and Finger out of the discussion and focus on the issue.If any cartoonist hired a writer, the writer didn't receive "credit" or "co-ownership" because the artist was trying to pull a fast one; it was due to the fact that the writer was a freelancer and the relationship with the artist was usually a temporary one. The writer could be there for a year, two years or they could have been gone the next day! This was not a benefit only for the artist: it was also a good way for fledgling writers to "get their feet wet", so to speak. It also provided veteran writers a chance to pick up some "quick cash" without ruining their reputations by working on material they felt was "beneath" them. A historian may mention the freelancer and his or her contributions as a matter of historical significance, but it doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day, it was the cartoonist's comic strip. Getting back to the Dark Knight, the fact that BATMAN became a franchise has nothing to do with it. The benefit to Mr. Finger is that because of that frachise and his role at the beginning, he went on to have a remarkable and memorable career. If he had become a "pulp writer",he would have been just one of the many writers of that medium who are now forgotten. (For the record, Chrissy Snow was the original "goofy girl" portrayed by Suzanne Somers on THREE'S COMPANY)Bernard ferrell 16:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry you find Men of Tomorrow abysmal; it's gotten extraordinarily good reviews and is a very respected book. You're asking us to take your word over that of an acclaimed comics historian who spent months or years researching and writing, and having his book vetted by fact-checkers and the publisher's legal department.

I'm not saying that it or any other book is infallible. But it has a very high degree of credibility for all these reasons.

And as much as I admire your love of the comics and of these Golden Age creators in particular — something I share with you — I hope you'll accept this as no personal slight to say that because of some of the idiosyncratic things you post, the level of your writing, and the fannish partisanship I see, I would really, really like to work with you on this one paragraph's worth of edits at a time.

I ask this for the reasons I cite below, which I have also placed on your own talk page. It is too much to expect your fellow editors to go through a plethora of claims and your raw grammar/spelling/punctuation. (Why you write "WONDER WOMAN" in all caps, for one example, is hard to understand.)

Please, in the spirit of cooperation, read the below. If I revert, it's only because the number of fixes I or anyone else would have to do all at once is overwhelmingly hard to keep track of.

I know it's a lot to get hit with all at once, but I know you know we're all trying to make this as good an article as we can. Thanks, -- Tenebrae 03:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

CC of postings to User: The Batmaniac

Let me just give an example of what I mean. You replaced

He also wrote many of the original 1940s Green Lantern stories.

with

As a writer, Mr.Finger went on to contribute to the development of Green Lantern and numerous other concepts throughout his career.

Leaving aside the continued, inexplicable lack of space after a period or a comma in "Mr.Finger," we don't need to say "As a writer" since the entire article is about him as a writer. We don't need to say "Mr. Finger," but just "Finger." You replace the very specific and precise verb "wrote" with the vague "contribute to the development of". You call Green Lantern a "concept" rather than a "character". And why say "numerous other concepts" instead of telling us what other characters he wrote for, identifying them either here or else later in the article.

OK, I've got a lot to go tackle. I can only hope you take this specific example seriously. Thanks. --Tenebrae 03:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, regarding the below Kane quote: You've removed a sentence from a direct, verbatim quote. You can't do that. If a part is being left out, you have to use ellipses to indicate that a part has been left out. Or are you saying that the quote was taken from the book incorrectly? Until we

BEFORE
Bill Finger was a contributing force on Batman right from the beginning. He wrote most of the great stories and was influential in setting the style and genre other writers would emulate ... I made Batman a superhero-vigilante when I first created him. Bill turned him into a scientific detective.

AFTER
Bill Finger was a contributing force on Batman right from the beginning. I made Batman a superhero-vigilante when I first created him. Bill turned him into a scientific detective.

If you could confirm exactly what the full quote is, that would help the accuracy of this passage immensely. Thanks --Tenebrae 03:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

When I compressed the Kane quote elaborating on his opinion of Bill's writing, I did so because it repeated what he said in the later quote I included at the bottom. I thought the second one sounded better and was a great summation of his opinion. I still feel his quotation of Bill's costume suggestion was more intimate and conversational, "reading" as more immediate. As for MEN OF TWOMORROW, I gave a specific reason as to why I find it lacking. It sounds like gossip and if you read his bibliography (and I use that term very loosely) he mostly relied on interviews, not actual research. Not only with "bird man" (as I noted above) but one source he used was Jerry Bails' "A Finger In Every Plot", an "article" mostly made of opinion...not research that nearly caused a rift between Bob Kane and Bill Finger (don't take my word for it. Just compare THE BOB KANE LETTER to what Jones "selectively" quoted in his book. Is it merely a coincidence that he left out Kane's statement "I have never underestimated all of the help I've received"). In other words, he used the same tactics as some of the so-called "tabloid journalists" which is to take a spoonful of fact and mix it with a heavy dose of opinion,bias and hostility. A summation of his gossipy cheapshots reads like so: Kane(was a skirt chasing sleazeball), Bill Finger(...a boozing milqtoast), Jerry Siegel (...a back stabbing opportunist)and Stan Lee (...a lying credit hog who never wrote anything). Need I go on? This is what I cautioned against on the Kane page. As for my use of capitals on certain occasions it's because I was taught that the titles of books,magazines or movies\plays was to be capitalized while the titles of articles or chapters appeared in quotation marks. Tee-hee. The Batmaniac

You can't change people's quotes because you think it reads better. Thank you for adding the ellipses as required.

Your version of Men of Tomorrow is untenable. You are a fan who takes offense at a respected author's complex characterizations of complex people, reducing pages and chapters to one-dimensional sentences. Kane, etc., are more complicated than that.

"Tee-hee"? What is going on here? Please stop this parade of bad grammar, syntax, punctuation, etc. You're making unnecessary work for other people and chuckling about it. --Tenebrae 15:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't laughing at correction efforts but pointing out that elsewhere, some of the practices I have used are perfectly acceptable. (Oh, and by the way, speaking of bad grammar, what is a "slew of Boy Wonders?" A body count? While I don't want to get into a prolonged debate over "...Twomorrow" I will ask you this: did you check the items I specifically mentioned? They are easy to find on the web. We have caught him on "bird man" and as I mentioned on another occasion, Jones claimed that Kane "blasted Finger in public" without mentioning the key event and what led to it. That is deliberate manipulation. Who cares if he is a "respected author"? Richard Nixon was a respected president before 1973 and we know how that turned out.The Batmaniac

Not sure what you mean by "slew of Boy Wonders" or "Twomorrow," neither of which I see here.

We can't discount a respected professional author based on any one person's say-so. There was hard evidence and credible commentary about Nixon. If there is any such for Jones, that's fine; please provide links.

The Wikipedia powers-that-be say not to point at other articles as justification for questionable edits. They know that hundreds of thousands of articles need work to be brought up to standard. It's an ongoing process, and Wikipedia is still very young.

Also, please sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~) This leaves a link and a timestamp, and is part of Wiki etiquette. Thanks for understanding. --Tenebrae 14:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Remember, the toppling of the Nixon administration began with one person. Fun note: I was re-reading Steranko and did you know Bill started to call Green Lantern "Alan Ladd" after Aladdin but the editor thought it was a corny name? This was before the actor Alan Ladd made his Hollywood debut..The Batmaniac

You have to understand, a lot of what I'm reading in your posts is your interpretation of things, i.e., opinion. I know you seem very certain of them, but please remember it is only an opinion. Other people can look at the same documentation and interpret it a different way — that's why we only put in the documentation and leave interpretation to the reader. You've generally been good about that lately on the article pages themselves, and I appreciate the chance to collaborate with you that way.

Is there any reason not to use the four tildes? --Tenebrae 16:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I used the four tildes in my second version of my addendum, however they chose to retain the first version. While I admit it is my opinion but that may be due to the fact that I have worked in a studio environment and am well aware that in that type of situation, ideas flow about hither and thither and with deadlines to meet, there is no time for taking bows. I am also a devout historian of various forms of Pop Art, both the finished product and the process of its creation. Credit is the least concern for a beginning creator. They worry much more about payment and honing their skills in preparation for the next step in their careers. This is why I have been a vociferous defender of both Misters Kane and Finger. They each worked very hard in their respective careers and neither one of them felt they were "Kaned" or "Fingered" (Dick Sprang is quoted as saying, "the only thing he cared about seeing his name on was a paycheck!")

I won't go into detail and try to resurrect a dead horse but basically there is a saying: "Check your ego at the door". You only get as much "credit" as the studio boss decides to give you. Or as Al Bundy might have said: "If you want your name on the door, get your own door." I think some of the people who work in comic books don't understand (or forgot) this simple premise and do a lot of whining in various fanzines and such; poisoning the minds of impressionable young fans through various methods. I have tried to show, through many examples, that Bill Finger wasn't victimized by Mr. Kane, per se, but by a system that didn't allow this talented writer to prosper in the same manner as some of his peers have in other fields. Heck, never mind Mr.Kane, I wish Bill had gotten the same arrangement as writer William Marston had!

As for Gerry Jones, well, I will definitely do some data linking (uh, that is when I figure out how.) Perhaps I am just naturally suspicious but I am befuddled as to why so many people assumed his book was 100% unbiased fact? They swallowed his "bird man" argument whole. But c'mon, in his book Jones acknowledged that "bird man" had a reddish costume with black wings. Uh, did it ever make any sense that Bob would give a "bird man" BLACK wings? SPA FON! As for the credit source, I don't own it but I will try to copy it, ver batim, hopefully the shopkeeper won't toss me out! In conclusion, I noticed an error in the Sanderson quote above about Jack Burnley. He does have a bit of recognition, he was the creator (or co-creator, I'm not sure) of the Golden Age STARMAN. He also saw comics as a temporary job, leaving them to pursue his love of drawing sports 'toons.The Batmaniac

Citations R Us

Here is all the info I dug up concerning the citations requested. Every time I try to add the source, some other info is dropped. I think this page (and Kane's) is done. I'll meet ya at the Captain Marvel site. Need I mention that the BIG RED CHEESE is my second favorite character?

1. Gardner Fox "Bat-" arsenal attribution: "...Complete History", Daniels p.31

"  : "Batman and Me," Kane/Andrae p.103

2. NATIONAL (DC Comics) no byline policy: "Showcase Presents:Batman vol. 2 Credit page\intro

"Until the 1970s, it was not common practice in the comic industry to credit all stories."

(Personal note: this was true but Marvel gave out bylines,although they were often mis-leading. Charlton allowed artists to sign their name and in the late 60s, DC did the same. However, I think it was Jack Kirby who said the main rationale for comic book companies' refusal of giving out bylines is because they didn't want to reveal their talent pool to their competition and even forbade "moonlighting".)

3. Finger's use of "giant props": "Batman and Me," Kane/Andrae p.119-120

"  : "Steranko's History..." p. 49

4. Finger names "Gotham City": "Steranko's History..." p. 45

I'm BA-AAck! I think this page could use a tad more space. Everytime I try to add the citations, the page deletes some other information. I think this is as close to perfect as we can get but since the partisanship is so (unnessarily) strong, I don't think it will ever earn an A! What do you think Batman fans? I would love it if we could be as sensible as the Captain Marvel group. The Real One, that is. DOH! —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:The Batmaniac (talk • contribs) 17:36, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Bats. I've added three of the four requested citations. One of them doesn't really answer the comment in the article that National adopted a no-byline policy in the 1940s. The sentence you were diligent and industrious enough to research reads "Until the 1970s, it was not common practice in the comic industry to credit all stories." That sentence is talking about common industry practice, not a formal policy. It also doesn't say anything about such a policy, if it existed, starting up in the mid-1940s.

But a cite may turn up. We'll both look. Good Wiki'ing, B. --Tenebrae 23:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

DC has always been sheepish about fessing up to their no credit policy. But one can see how it was practiced. After they defeated Siegel and Shuster in the late 40s, DC removed their bylines from the book. After the merger with All-American, any signatures or bylines were again,removed. Yes, this was standard practice in the comic book industry but as we have seen, there were some exeptions but they weren't universal. Writers,inkers and letterers never got credit. I started to include DC writer Bob Haney's comment from the Comics Journal ("We were writers and we were seen as s*** and got treated like treated like s***! If anybody got credit, it was usually an artist!") That is the gist of it, not a direct quote, I don't have the article with me. Uhh, the quote from Showcase was more--family friendly. Jack Kirby said it was industry practice because the publishers didn't like revealing their talent pool to competitors. Bernard ferrell 16:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

For reference:

"After years of stasis, the [1960s' DC COMICS] staff was augmented by young talent, while pillars like editor Mort Weisinger retired. There was a struggle for direction as the industry sank into a slump after the Pop Art boom, while cover prices crept inexorably upward and the small retail outlets that had supported comics became obsolete. For some professionals, it looked like the lettering was on the wall. A group of veteran writers, including Bill Finger, Gardner Fox and Otto Binder, pressured DC to provide pensions and insurance; they ended up losing their jobs." -Les Daniels, 60 Years of DC COMICS, p.151-

This is the reason why Finger left DC. According to Charles Paris and Joe Desris, in the profile on Bill in BATMAN: THE SUNDAY CLASSICS, the last years of his writing career were spent writing for television and commercials. Gerry Jones' insipid book had us believing Finger was totally finished! That's "drama" for ya!Bernard ferrell 14:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I replaced the second Kane quote with one from George Roussos because it re-iterates what Kane said about Bill's being an "unsung hero". Roussos also had no axe to grind (nor awards to promote)and was very well familiar with the "Studio System" approach to production. Besides,it ends the page on a more positive note while maintaining neutrality. I wish we could lock the Kane and Finger pages like The Batman's. A lot of work went into them and I shudder to think what biased individuals might do to them. The Batmaniac

Quotes

I've moved the quotes section to WikiQuote, the project which is geared up to contain lists of quotes. As to the claim that the quotes listed within the separate section are presented without bias, either we present all sourced quotes regarding Finger, and then we are presenting without bias but are also in breach of WP:NOT, or we present none, and then we are both in accordance with WP:NOT and without bias. Presenting a select few is presenting with bias. Hiding T 20:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

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) 15:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Bill Finger's life

Did he do anything else than comics? Did he marry? How did he die? Did he get any credit while he was alive, or monetary compensation? Did he have family, and do they royalties? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.184.84.18 (talk) 10:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Good question(s). Yes to the first, but no--as far as I can tell--on all other counts. 00:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.140.189.253 (talk)

Finger had one son, Fred, who died in 1992. Fred had a daughter, Athena, who now receives the reprint royalties for DC stories written by Finger. This is only recently; for a long time it was assumed there was no living descendant and the royalties were going to Fred's last partner's later partner [1]. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

date of birth verification

An "In Memoriam" page in Famous First Edition published by DC in 1975 gave Finger's date of birth as February 8, 1914. A reproduction of this page can be seen here at the "Dial B For Blog" site. I'm still hoping to find some other sources for Finger's date of death. Mtminchi08 (talk) 04:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion to add to first paragraph re: Finger's role vs. Kane's

I'm the author of the only bio of Finger and I can't quote myself, but hope someone would be willing to add this quotation from Jerry Robinson to the first paragraph:

Jerry Robinson said, “[Bill] had more to do with the molding of Batman than Bob. He just did so many things at the beginning,…creating almost all the other characters,…the whole persona, the whole temper.”

It is from page 43 of BILL THE BOY WONDER (already cited in article). I feel it is the most compelling and authoritative statement explaining how significant Bill's role was, and Jerry is certainly in a position to make such a statement as he was one of the ghost artists who began on the strip during its debut year. He worked closely with both men before National hired him and Finger away from Kane. There is considerable misconception about how involved Kane was in the creative aspects of the strip. He was not an idea man and in fact did not write a single Batman story in his lifetime.

Thank you for considering this.Mtn (talk) 04:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Jerry Robinson, who was there with Kane and an eyewitness, is certainly important to mention up top. I couldn't find a similar quote just now in the Couch book Jerry Robinson: Ambassador of Comics, so I'm sure other, disinterested editors would agree this quote from your book should go in. I'll add it now. --Tenebrae (talk)

Thank you so much. I appreciate your understanding and time. Mtn (talk) 05:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

One doesn't have to "write a single word" to contribute to the development of one's own series especially in collaboration with a writer you have hired. If all Kane said to Bill was "I don't like this", that's all it takes. Or he said: "Give me a woman villain in the next story" and Finger or whomever delivers a character called "The Cat (-woman)" then it is the same. When you are the boss, you have a lot of power. That's why I say there is a lot of bias whenever this discussion pops up. One is tempted to take one side or the other, seldom is there a balanced account. I have read extensively about the studio system in comics and other art forms so this is a subject I am well familiar with. Also,I would argue that Gardner Fox deserves more of the credit for the personality of the character than Finger. Finger's first story was swiped from The Shadow, so that isn't "really" Batman and in his second story, The Batman behaves more like a laughing Zorro type. Fox created the Bat-Devices and defined the character as a grim avenger; Finger followed his lead when he returned to the series. Also, there is still the issue of who wrote the actual origin. Kane remembers discussing it with Bill but Fox claimed he wrote it. So the plot may have come from Kane and Finger but the execution may have been by Fox.MARK VENTURE (talk) 07:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I also tried to insert "page 34" for the citation re: Bill's death date but am not getting it to work. If anyone else can...many thanks. Mtn (talk) 05:10, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

So Bill's death date and Fred's death date both appear on page 34? --Tenebrae (talk) 05:28, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

In my book, Fred's death date is on page 46. Mtn (talk) 06:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Roussos/suggestion for reorg of (current) 2nd paragraph

I strongly believe the 2nd paragraph is flawed and should be amended. As the author of a book on Finger, I'm unable to make such changes, so I put this forth to those who can.

1. Remove Roussos quotation

Of the scores if not hundreds of eyewitness quotations I've gathered about Bill Finger by his contemporaries, this Roussos one is not one that a historian who has read them all would put anywhere near the top in terms of reliability. In fact, the rest of this very entry contradicts that Bill merely "sort of organized" someone else's ideas. However well-intentioned, Roussos's assessment (which I read not as a thought-out statement For The Record but rather as a quick, casual aside that he would probably rephrase if given the chance) is markedly inconsistent with the descriptions of nearly every other major player including Kane's (even in most of these "sanctioned" statements: http://noblemania.blogspot.com/2012/02/bill-finger-named-co-creator-in-dc.html). As such, I feel it does not belong in the lead of the article about Bill Finger. To say that Kane "had [the] ideas" when he did not write a single Batman story in his lifetime and drew stories only in the earliest years, whereas Finger not only independently wrote 1,500 stories over 25 years but designed the costume, wrote the first appearances of Robin/Joker/Catwoman/many more, built the bat-motif, named "Gotham City" and "Bruce Wayne," nicknamed Batman "the Dark Knight," etc., is irresponsible.

2. Remove Goulart quotation

Or at least replace. He is a generalist who wrote comics encyclopedias; there are other comics figures with more of a focus on Batman whom I would sooner quote (Carmine Infantino, Julie Schwartz, maybe Denny O'Neil, Michael Uslan, Mark Evanier, or Les Daniels), but given the positions of the other three already here (Kane, Robinson, Levitz), I don't think a fourth is necessary.

3. If Roussos and/or Goulart are kept, I would reorg so the order of the quotations is as follows (most to least authoritative in terms of proximity to Finger):

a) Kane - I'd also remove "contributing force" since it is redundant; the entry's opening line establishes this

b) Robinson - he was the 5th person (after Kane, Finger, Guardineer, and Moldoff) and one of the "original big three" to work on Batman; widely considered the fairest authority on the subject

c) Levitz - he was speaking as an employee of DC Comics which gives considerable weight to his statement - it appears to credit Finger and Kane equally; this in contrast to the phrasing most commonly seen ("created by Bob Kane with help from Bill Finger" or some variation thereof)

d) Goulart

e) Roussos

Thank you for your consideration. Mtn (talk) 06:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

As a disinterested party, I would have to say re: point 1 that Roussos was an eyewitness and his eyewitness account shouldn't be removed simply because it doesn't refer to FInger unequivocally as Batman's creator. It would be biased to remove it on that basis. As to point 2, I'm not sure what the objection is: Goulart is a well-respected comics historian, and as such is in a better position to offer an objective opinion that most. As to point 3: Kane's concession seems most authoritative, followed by an objective historian and comics-encyclopedia editor, followed by a contemporaneous eyewitness, followed by a latter-day official statement. I'd say the Levitz quote is redundant after all that, but I won't advocate to remove it. I'd also have to sugget that Jerry Robinson is probably right in his views, in my opinion, but he's clearly a Finger partisan who created an award in Finger's honor; that last point alone mitigates against his objectivity and being "the fairest authority on the subject"--Tenebrae (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

First of all, George Roussos never said (all)"The iceas" came from Kane. He said Kane had "ideas", meaning he would occasionally contribute a random suggestion. In fact, Kane compared them with the suggestions Finger had about the costume. The opinions of "...most Golden Agers" do not trump that of an actual eye witness. For instance, in the interview with Gary Groth for The Comics Journal, Robinson admitted he didn't know how Bill and Bob worked together because he mostly concentrated on his schoolwork. But Roussos apparently witnessed incidents on more than one occasion as he could also comment on Robinson's being a slow and deliberate penciller, who corrected any drawing errors Kane made. I can't remember if it was Robinson or Roussos who commented that the studio members would sometimes chime in on a given story. For his own part, Kane gave Bill the credit for the final product but he was adamant about his own contributions. One example is The Penguin, he admitted that he only had a name based on a cigarette ad at the time; however, he gave Finger the credit for creating the concept, even though the final look of the character might have come from a discussion between the two parties. Given every member of the Kane Studio's individual accounts, what they describe was just a typical studio situation. Although Finger might have preferred to work alone, even when he started working for DC, according to the Steranko book, he had to have plot discussions with Whitney Ellsworth, which is similar to how Al Feldstein worked with Bill Gaines. So under these circumstances, there is no way anyone can guarantee that a script by Bill Finger, or anyone else in a similar situation, is 100% by the scripter because changes or contributions are often made. MARK VENTURE (talk) 03:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Bought Nobleman book, working from it

For the moment, I've commented out the Jerry Robinson quote that begins with the bracketed "[Bill]." I see that quote, bracket and all, on page two of the "Author's Note" at the back, but it's unclear where that quote originated — in that same grouping of quotes, Nobleman uses "told me" in reference to a Carmine Infantino quote, but the Schwarz quoted is unsourced and the Levitz quote is sourced as Detective Comics. Since at least one and possibly two of these quotes were not given directly to Nobleman, and since Nobleman specifically says "told me" in reference to Infantino and not to Robinson, that suggests this was not a direct quote from Robinson to Nobleman. And I can't find anywhere else else this quote appears, even after looking through every indexed mention of Finger (and one that the index missed) in the book Jerry Robinson": Ambassador of Comics. Because we need to go to original sources for quotes (since they can change in the retelling), we need to ascertain the source of this one. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, and I see in two sections above that we've tried to source this quote before. I'll see if I can find something similar — Jerry said a version of this many times, I believe.--Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I've finished going through Bill the Boy Wonder, and I've added something like five or six cites from it, as well as a pertinent quote by Nobleman as biographer. The article seems better and better documented all the time. Marc Tyler Nobleman did very noble work, if I may be forgiven the kind of pun that Bill Finger himself enjoyed. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi - sorry for my delay. As you can tell, I rarely edit or check here. I appreciate you referring to my book, and for the most kind compliment.

Sources for the quotations on page 2 of my author's note:

• Robinson ("[Bill] had more do to with the molding...") - from an interview I conducted (and recorded) with Robinson on 6/9/06
• Infantino (RIP) - as it happens, this also came from an interview recorded on 6/9/06
• Schwartz - page 155 of his autobiography, MAN OF TWO WORLDS, a book cited in the bibliography
• Levitz - sourced on that page (DETECTIVE #500)

In the future, feel free to contact me for source information; always happy to provide it and save you the hunt!

Unlike books aimed only at the adult market, the picture book format typically does not allow for footnoting. However, my primary sources are indicated in the back matter, as is the fact that "dialogue is excerpted from interviews and other primary sources." And as you, Tenebrae, noted on my talk page, in so many words, format has no bearing on assessing level/accuracy of material. Because some still hold the perception that a work of nonfiction for a younger audience (or, as in my case, an all-ages audience) does not carry the credibility of a longer work, I blogged (some years ago) about some of the realities of writing in this format in a post called "The Golden Age of Picture Book Biography": http://noblemania.blogspot.com/2009/04/golden-age-of-picture-book-biography.html.

As noted earlier, Roussos's quotation is bizarrely inconsistent with the assessment on record of literally every other Golden Ager I know of about how Bill and Bob worked; on page 119 of Kane's autobio, he called Finger a "boy wonder" of ideas. Even though Kane had some ideas (Two-Face), Roussos's quotation inaccurately implies he provided ALL the ideas; again, if you add up the elements that Kane gives Finger credit for in his autobio alone, coupled with published accounts by Steranko and Les Daniels and Jim McLauchlin and Jerry Bails and others, Finger was the majority creative force in the foundation of Batman. I feel Robinson also carries more weight than Goulart, since Robinson knew Finger personally, and from early on. Robinson had nothing to gain by being partisan (and in fact had something to lose - his consultant status with DC); he was simply calling it like he saw it. Therefore, may I appeal to you or another editor to reinstate the Robinson quotation? Mtn (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Marc. This is a tricky thing. Obviously, I believe you're who you say you are. But Wikipedia policy — and rightly so — can't rely on me or other editors believing what someone writes on a talk page about personally doing an interview with someone or other. There's no way around it — quotes and other claims have to be available in published (print or online) sources or else it's considered original research.

However, unlike most other people, because Marc Tyler Nobleman is the author of a book about Finger and a reliable source in the comics-historian community, we can use your blog as reference source — the one exception for citing personal blogs is when they're the blog of an established, published expert in a particular field. If you put the Robinson quote or even, say, your whole interview transcript, on your blog and make clear on the blog that it comes from your 6/9/06 interview, then the quote can be added and properly cited. We can't remove the Roussos quote, because he said it, he was an eyewitness and we have to be neutral and not partisan. But the Robinson quote will then be in. Does that work? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:58, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate it. I'm happy to put the quotation on my blog, but isn't it enough that it's in a book? Or are you saying that because it's in a book but not individually footnoted, it's ineligible? Also, I didn't understand this: "the one exception for citing personal blogs is when they're the blog of an established, published expert in a particular field." I am established, published, and, for what little it's worth, an expert of sorts on Bill Finger. Mtn (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree: That's my point — Marc Tyler Nobleman is a published expert in the field, so we can use Nobleman's blog as a reference citation

RE: "Or are you saying that because it's in a book but not individually footnoted, it's ineligible?" Exactly: If that same quote were in a standard book biography rather than a children's book, it 'would be footnoted or there would otherwise be indication in the book's "Notes" section to the effect of "Robinson interview with the author, June 9, 2006." In the context of a children's book, which is not where fresh reportorial interviews ever generally appear, it is unclear where the quote originates. --Tenebrae (talk) 08:57, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The Jerry Robinson interview with the "molding" quotation is now live and in business! http://noblemania.blogspot.com/2013/06/jerry-robinson-previously-unpublished_19.html Thank you again for offering to add that quotation to the Finger entry once the interview is online. Mtn (talk) 13:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Done! Nice collaboration! --Tenebrae (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Appreciate your time. But now the photo of Bill is gone...do you know why? Mtn (talk) 17:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No. But the article's history page ought to show who removed it and when. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

That's the thing - I don't see it. I see a line about removing the LINK to an already-removed jpg, but can't seem to find when and why the actual image was removed? It would have been sometime quite recently...do you see it? Mtn (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Just because someone is a "respected expert" in his or her field doesn't mean they are free of bias. In a battle between "experts" on any given subject, I would think that the neutral "expert" would have more credibility than one who has a bias. I would hope that any encyclopedia or third party author would weigh each accordingly or at least offer a contrast between the two opinions.MARK VENTURE (talk) 04:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC) Just to follow up, I suggest that the Bob Kane, Bill Finger and Batman pages all be locked! There's just too many wannabe bloggers or authors writing distorted books or stories about what would ordinarily be a study of how a character was created in s studio environment; just one of thousands that have existed in the history of commercial art and the fine arts in general. The Batman, Kane and Finger have all become political "footballs" for issues related to comic book production and\or creative rights or the lack of thereof. When someone can pick on George Roussos, who had no axe to grind, just because he wouldn't support a "Hate Kane" or "Finger did it all" argument, just demonstrates to me why Wiki should lock these pages and rise above it all.MARK VENTURE (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Weird sentence

Finger wrote both the initial script for Batman's debut in Detective Comics #27 (May 1939) and the character's second appearance, while Kane provided art.

This is a poorly constructed sentence. Where does "both" go? Did he not write "the initial script" for the character's second appearance? What does that even mean? But I can't fix it without checking the sources -- could someone check which information comes from which source (the sources are also formatted somewhat awkwardly -- one source that says "both X and Y" would be better, for instance) and fix it? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bill Finger. 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/20120204122050/http://franklovece.com/webexclusives.html to http://franklovece.com/webexclusives.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.comics101.com/comics101/?mode=project&action=view&project=Comics+101&chapter=67
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304114836/http://comicsalliance.com/bill-finger-batman-comics-credit/ to http://comicsalliance.com/bill-finger-batman-comics-credit/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 20:02, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

"Only confirmed photo of Finger"

Propose removing phrase "Only confirmed photo of Finger" from photo caption. We currently know of 17 photos of Bill: https://www.noblemania.com/2016/07/all-known-bill-finger-photos-as-of-now.html. Several of them have been identified in DC Comics publications.

(By the way, I'm the same user as Mtn above, but I have not edited or posted any Talk comments since then, and when I tried to log in now with that user name and the password I'd noted, it didn't seem to have me in the system. So perhaps I never registered? But would it have allowed me to post a Talk comment without registering?)

Writermtn (talk) 23:25, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I call BS on the whole photo itself. Come on. Its not congruent with the fashion of the time plus it doesnt even look like him based on all the other 13 photos.

Thats at a minimum a 90's photo. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 09:07, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Source for date (September 27, 1936) of photo of Finger in baseball cap?

In my extensive Bill Finger research, I never saw that baseball cap photo dated (even the year, let alone the day); this includes DC publications "50 Who Made DC Great" and "Batman: The Complete History" (both of which reprint the photo undated). I checked the edit history of this page, but don't see when this was added or by whom. Can anyone else find that info so we can ask/cite where this date came from?

Writermtn (talk) 03:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone determine who posted the date of the photo so we can ask for the source? Writermtn (talk) 03:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

190.148.87.67 (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2024 (UTC)