Do We Need A New Who's Who Series?

[kossori]

With the tight continuity that DC has been building since Identity Crisis, does anyone else think that we could use an updated version of the old Who's Who series?

I'm not talking about the one-shot Secret Files and Origins... I mean a series that covers everybody who's been involved in the stories of the last five years or so...

I sure would like to see one.

[Sijo]

I think so, but I don't think the DC admins care enough right now. (Besides, it would make all their recent screw ups more evident.)

[Blind pugh]

It would damn sure help me get back into reading more D.C

[KYLeo71]

I'll give an emphatic YES! I loved the original 'Who's Who' and I'd love an updated edition that contains and reflects only this histories and stats as they currently apply to the DCU. I think it would make a great reference guide and I believe that once the individual issues are collected in a hardcover trade, it will be a constant big seller. IMO, it sounds like a win-win for all.

[COMIC GEEK]

I say sure why not.

if anyone is looking for the originals btw, hit me up with a p/m

[CYOTI]

No not when you have wikipedia, which makes these things redundant.

[Buried Alien]

No not when you have wikipedia, which makes these things redundant.

The WHO'S WHO entries were more thorough and accurate than most Wikipedia entries. Moreover, WHO'S WHO would have the authority of publisher's canon (provided they stick with what they print). Wikipedia doesn't offer that.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[CYOTI]

The WHO'S WHO entries were more thorough and accurate than most Wikipedia entries.

No they aren't. Most of them were just a few paragraphs of text with some original art with facts about a character that everybody knew about. Wiki articles however were more in depth with the real world history, canon history and the history that were rendered non-canonical by new writers.

Moreover, WHO'S WHO would have the authority of publisher's canon

In DC's case thats pretty much worthless given their total reckless disregard to continuity in certain cases.

And I don't think there is a market for comic readers who don't know how to use wikipedia.

[COMIC GEEK]

www.titanstower.com

can provide you the "who's who" of the titans universe

[Brother Zag]

This strikes me as old school thinking. Who's Who should be an online part of the DC site, constantly updated, so that it has the authority of the publisher and the flexibility of a wiki. Marvel does something close to that, but it's too much wiki and too little authority for my tatse.

[CYOTI]

www.mykey3000.com/cosmicteams

This site probably is probably the most definite source on the DCU with emphasis on the Legion, Outsiders,JSA and JLA and up to date and in depth articles on all the major and obscure characters and teams.

[jAWSH!]

The DC Encyclopedia was a nice try, but I'd prefer a Who's Who release similar to what they had in the 80s.

The larger Who's Who with removable pages was also a nice try, but in the end was kinda hard to manage. BYOB (bring your own binder).

[kossori]

I liked the DC Encyclopedia... Maybe if it was released in chapters (individual issues) and then collected as a hardcover/tpb (re:KYLeo71) then even that would suffice.

Wikipedia, to me, is similar to fan-fiction vs. the real thing. It may be free but it ain't official.
And let's not forget that not everyone has internet. It may be more common now but there's still some folks out there that spend their money on other things.

[Grico]

This strikes me as old school thinking. Who's Who should be an online part of the DC site, constantly updated, so that it has the authority of the publisher and the flexibility of a wiki. Marvel does something close to that, but it's too much wiki and too little authority for my taste.

That's kind of how I feel about. Who's Who also have the problem of taking awhile to come out and by the time you get to the end things have changed. Online sources can be updated instantaneously. Still, the books were fun back in the day (and the Marvel Handbook) and the preponderance of old school fans might be enough to make it profitable enough to print. So as resource, online is better, as nostalgia piece, I'm not against it.

[Hawkman]

I don't know about "need," but I would certainly buy it. I suppose if nothing else it would go a long way in making sure DC's readers are more or less on the same page.