Talk:Rogues (comics)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Page moved?[edit]
Unlike the individual villians, there are numerous references to this grouping of charactes as 'The Rogues', self-referentially and by other characters, the writers and artists, and so on. As such, I think it meets the Wiki rules for namign by staying at The Rogues.ThuranX 02:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Art Credit[edit]
Could someone please put an "Art by [[Artist]]" under the picture?--Tuberculosisness 20:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
New Rogues[edit]
Should we have mentions of new rogues who join the group (Owen, the second Trickster) who've taken up the name of old ones? Darquis 22:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Table[edit]
The tables recently added seem clumssy and unneeded. because different characters have different lengths of write-up and histories, the table is irregular in length. There also seems to be some recent expansion to make this 'all enemies of the flash', insted of the Rogues, a subset of Flash's enemies who actively and regularly associate and collaborate. I think a long review is needed, and the table should be removed. ThuranX 19:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I was the one who put the tables in, and I don't see anything wrong with it. First of all, it is pointless to have two pages on Flash villains, this one and also List of Flash enemies (which is in really bad shape by the way). I'm trying to get List of Flash enemies to be merged with this page, because who is a rogue and who is not is a matter of opinion. I think that all Flash villains are Rogues (remember, they don't like being called "super-criminals"), but "The Rogues" are Cold, Mirror Master, Heat Wave, THe new rogues, etc. So I just wanted al Flash villains on one page, and because they like the name rogues, this is the better page. As for the table, it was made to make the article look better and more organized (as that is what all tables on Wikipedia are for). If you are still not convinced, take a look at List of Batman enemies, List of Superman enemies, List of Wonder Woman enemies, and List of Green Lantern enemies. They are the same as this page, a collection of all a hero's enemies on one page, they all use the table, same as here, and the characters have different lengths because frankly, there is more to say about The Joker than Kite-Man. Think of this page as the same thing as those other four, exept that this one has a different name. Oh yeah, and could you please tell me what "removal of speculation/OR, assumed emotions, unfounded conlusions" is, because I have no idea. Rhino131 22:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, who is a rogue and who is not is NOT a matter of opinion. That's been made clear over the years. Asserting all X are Y is a fallacious argument, and it's occuring here. Some of the villians have disavowed the rogues, others hired them, yet others have worked with them, but aren't part of their clique. As such, I removed Blacksmith, a crime lord, not rogue, who happened to assemble a new group and task them as her Rogues. She wasn't one of them, just as goldface wasn't one of the old Rogues. I will be reverting it out. As to your decision, it consittutes a direct violations of WP:SYNTH. The table is ugly, as I stated, because of the irrugular sizes of the descriptions. As for my edit summary, it means exactly what it said. The write-ups contained guesses about the statuses of characters, or drew conclusions not in evidence, there were writeups about how peopel felt later after events without citation, and so on. It's quite clear. I'll be reverting your unexplained reversion. ThuranX 22:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sigh...........Okay, to save us the trouble of bickering for the rest of our lives about characters that aren't real, lets compromise. List of Flash enemies will be all villains, and Rogues (comics) will be the nine silver age ones and the new rogues. Fair enough? Rhino131 23:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are separate issues in WP:COMIC about list by hero sort of lists, but yeah, it's a better solution than trying to lump anyone Flash fights into the Rogues. I'd suggest noting in text form the trio that used to oppose Garrick (Fiddler, Thinker, Shade), then the classic rogues, and under modern age, first list the 'replacement' rogues, and then, under a separate subheading, Blacksmith's rogues. given how bizarre the interactions between the two groups have been, from hostile to vaguely aligned to dismissive, it's owrth keeping them separate in the article, but noting them as well. ThuranX 23:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm assuming you mean CB II, trickster II, and MM II when you say replacments, so if that is the case, then I did that and the new rogues. I also put double down and tar pit in a different section because they were not part of the new rogues. Also took out enemies created for other media because they should go in the other article, and Griffin and golden age villains because they are not rogues. You can change anything I did if you want to, I'm going to work on List of Flash enemies. So long. Rhino131 00:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are separate issues in WP:COMIC about list by hero sort of lists, but yeah, it's a better solution than trying to lump anyone Flash fights into the Rogues. I'd suggest noting in text form the trio that used to oppose Garrick (Fiddler, Thinker, Shade), then the classic rogues, and under modern age, first list the 'replacement' rogues, and then, under a separate subheading, Blacksmith's rogues. given how bizarre the interactions between the two groups have been, from hostile to vaguely aligned to dismissive, it's owrth keeping them separate in the article, but noting them as well. ThuranX 23:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sigh...........Okay, to save us the trouble of bickering for the rest of our lives about characters that aren't real, lets compromise. List of Flash enemies will be all villains, and Rogues (comics) will be the nine silver age ones and the new rogues. Fair enough? Rhino131 23:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, who is a rogue and who is not is NOT a matter of opinion. That's been made clear over the years. Asserting all X are Y is a fallacious argument, and it's occuring here. Some of the villians have disavowed the rogues, others hired them, yet others have worked with them, but aren't part of their clique. As such, I removed Blacksmith, a crime lord, not rogue, who happened to assemble a new group and task them as her Rogues. She wasn't one of them, just as goldface wasn't one of the old Rogues. I will be reverting it out. As to your decision, it consittutes a direct violations of WP:SYNTH. The table is ugly, as I stated, because of the irrugular sizes of the descriptions. As for my edit summary, it means exactly what it said. The write-ups contained guesses about the statuses of characters, or drew conclusions not in evidence, there were writeups about how peopel felt later after events without citation, and so on. It's quite clear. I'll be reverting your unexplained reversion. ThuranX 22:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Um... as much as I like the idea of getting things done... It looks like some one seriously jumped the gun here. The merge was proposed less than three days ago. And the result wasn't even following what suggestions had been made.
- Maybe we should revert to the point be fore the forced merge and let the discussion take it course? - J Greb
Fair use rationale for Image:Flash Rogues.jpg[edit]
Image:Flash Rogues.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The Rogues[edit]
Is there an editor who can provide issue #'s and expand as "The Rogue" as an organization? This article would benifit for not being strictly a villain list by era, but to discuss the supergroup and when the term was coined, ect. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 02:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC).
Main Image[edit]
Why is the picture still of the gridmark 90's rouges that have been largely dropped in recent years. The new "classic" line up has been in some major stories recently and should be pictured. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.37.49.127 (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Dr. Alchemy[edit]
We're missing this classic Rogue. 108.18.157.232 (talk) 11:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Reverse Flash (Eobard Thawne)[edit]
This is perhaps the most important of all of the Flash's enemies, but he is not represented here. Perhaps he isn't considered a "rogue", but he is certainly an important enemy of the Flash and should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.166.66.114 (talk) 14:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rogues (comics). 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/20060323061226/http://www.monitorduty.com:80/mdarchives/2005/12/alan_kistlers_p_3.shtml to http://www.monitorduty.com/mdarchives/2005/12/alan_kistlers_p_3.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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) 07:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)