Talk:Brainiac (character)

Skull Diodes

If Superman #167 was Brainiac's first appearance with skull diodes, why does he have them on the cover of Action #242?

According to Alan Kristler's profile, they're on the cover, but not in the storyDaibhid C 22:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Smallville's Milton Fine isn't Brainiac

incidentally.) 68.162.208.203 is right about the name being an Easter Egg, but the fact they chose that name must be significant; if it was "David Conners", I'd be advocating adding the character to the Eradicator article.Daibhid C 22:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I remember that episode of Smallville. They were introducing the Eradicator, right?

In 'Vessel', Jor-el refers to Fine as the Brain InterActive Construct (Brain-i-a-c). Is this worth mentioning?

It already is mentioned. Check out the first paragraph under Television. CovenantD 01:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me.

Other media

Although we all try and forget the movie, should Superman III be included as a appearance of Brainiac? My understanding is that the super-computer was derived from his character.

I never saw that movie, but if it was meant as a reference or shares a similar origin, then yes. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The Character '''Optilux''' in the comic strip '''The Supreme''' is a Brainiac homage.

The "Brainiac (comics)" page is getting too long. I think to shorten it a little, the "In other media" section should have its own page titled "Brainiac in other media" or "Media adaptations of Brainiac". - Mediadimension —Preceding comment was added at 01:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the article is fine at the size it is now. If it gets bigger, it may need to be split apart. I suggest we follow this guideline.--Rockfang (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Television section

This section needs condensing. There is too much detail in the plot summaries. This is not supposed to be a substitute for watching the series. CovenantD 15:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Um...that what is it supposed to be? It's a fictional character history! If you would rather move the section to another article, you might as well say so rather than say the sources are "unverifiable". ---User:Johnnyfog.

A character history doesn't supercede policy on fictional universe articles. There are better ways to describe the character history without detailing events in each episode they have appeared in. It's called "out-of-universe" information, found from reliable sources, not information obtained from merely viewing the episode. I know Gough and Millar have discussed Brainiac many times during the course of Season 5. BTW, please tone down your comments and be a little more civil, you didn't have a reason to lash out at CovenantD. To the point, if it's "unverifiable" that doesn't mean that it needs to be moved, that means that you need to find sources that back up your information, otherwise it's considered speculation because anyone can think anything they want by merely watching the episode. That is why Wikipedia states that direct observation of the media is not a valid source. You can mention what happens there, but you shouldn't present it as fact if no one else backs it up. But Cov's right, the entire section (not to mention the verification) needs slimming. That character was on the show for 1 season, and not even every episode and yet that section is larger than most of the others that contain information from mediums that the character has been around longer. Bignole

Fibonacci Numbers

This is most likely a coincidence, but it seems that every numbered Brainiac with the exception of Brainiac-12 (who logically would have been numbered as such solely to connect him to Brainiac-13), as well as a few others if given numbers that logically fit their place in Brainiac's history, fit the first several numbers in the Fibonacci sequence. Is this worth a mention? It's a bit of a reach for now, but I wouldn't be surprised if the next one we see calls himself Brainiac-21...

Pre-Crisis Braniac in Post-Crisis Universe (from "Brainiac" article)

The information here is very confusing with very bad wording. Perhaps someone with knowledge of this storyline should rewrite it. I have no idea what to write because I have not read the story. 76.107.71.114 03:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Likewise the Pre-Crisis section needs some fine tuning to clarify that it is Brainiac 2 whose real name is Vril (sentence belongs in previous paragraph). Or is it? Man, this is one messed up character. Asat 07:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Quite confusing. This lists Braniac's alter ego as "Vril Dox" whereas, on the Vril Dox page, the textbox says that Dox's real name is Vril Dox II. On the Vril Dox page, the name Braniac 2 is not even mentioned once. I'm beginning to wonder whether or not that article should be entitled either Brainiac 2 or Vril Dox II. I suppose this is not the right place for me to ponder that but I still concur that Braniac is a confusing fellow indeed. Czar Baldy Bald IV 23:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Brainiac 5

Is there any reason to have the info on Brainiac 5 in other media in this article. The 2 are separate characters, and B5 has his own article. Dstumme (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

section about "the batman"

I do not think the section added here should be in this article. 1)This article is for Brainiac. He does not appear in that show. At least not to where the above addition mentions it. 2)It contains unsourced speculation. If anyone disagrees with me, feel free to discuss it here. I'm removing the section again.--Rockfang (talk) 23:14, 1 May 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) 15:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixing this article

Do we really need overly detailed plot summaries of the episodes he appear in? It seems very unencyclopedic, and it's an issue with many DC Comics characters' articles here. Really, all we need is a brief overview of the character's appearances in other media. I edited the OM section but J Greb reverted my edits. DCincarnate (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Do we want overbloated plot summaries, no.

Should there be some type of summary when no article exists that provides it, yes.

Your request for a single, specific POV on television plot summaries with Mysterio notwithstanding, what you did here, and most of what you've just done to Bizarro is not removal of OR or redundant information but deletion of content. (The "and Bizarro is alluded to in..." is a fair cop if there are no secondary sources — interviews or reviews — that draw such a conclusion and are cited.)

Are there articles on the books, episodes, and/or films that fairly cover:

• How the character was handled.
• Provide a reasonable summary of the plot and involvement of the character.
• Provide an image of the character if the depiction is markedly different from the iconic comics version. Or if the depictions is iconic in its own right.

Bluntly, simple lists with one or two sentence blurbs don't do that. Well done "In other media" sections/articles should, or they should point explicitly to the articles and the sections there in, that do.

(And yes, I'm suggesting you revisit your 15k purge of Bizarro and restore a chunk of it.)

- J Greb (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Adding WP:ROBO tag

...after talking with User:Hiding. If we can help, let us know. (P.S. Not watchlisting for now) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

In Other Media

This section should be at least a third its current size, if you cannot reduce it, then please move the bulk of the material to its own page. --Xero (talk) 18:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Infobox image

With the insistence that Image:Brainiac Roux.jpg be used as the infobox image we have hit the point where we really need to find a consensus of what is an appropriate image for this article keeping in mind Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Style guidance#Superhero box images.

The suggested image falls short on the guidelines. Specifically with the near monochromatic green color scheme and the "Head and shoulders" only view of the character. The current image Image:SupermanCv219.jpg isn't much better, having an issue with the character "curled up". Nor are three of the four previous 'box image (suggested or actually used) that are still in the article:

• Image:Action Comics 242.png - The character is viewed almost from the back.
• Image:ActionComics544brainiacluthor.jpg - The character is a minor part of the image.
• Image:Action868.jpg - The view is side on and the character is mostly obscured by the "techno-cocoon".

All six, including Image:Vridoxpost.png‎, all run afoul the guidelines intent that an iconic, immediately recognizable image be used. Action 242 and 544 may be the closest to iconic, but they really haven't been the character's look for 20+ years. Vridoxpost.png‎ is in the same boat, though it is next longest and most recent stable "look". The last three are effectively "and the new look this story is..." with both Roux and Action 868 coming from the same story arc.

With all of that, yes, the Superman v2 219 art should be change, but Roux piece is not a suitable improvement (it maybe a better image for the "Return" section, where Action 868 should be).

- J Greb (talk) 11:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure what you are asking for? I can provide an image from any era but I'm unclear when you want it from? --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Right now the question is 2 fold:

1. Does Image:Brainiac Roux.jpg meet the criteria for an infobox image, and if so is it an improvement over Image:SupermanCv219.jpg.
2. More generally, what should the infobox for this article contain and do any of the 6 listed images meet those needs.

If 2 is hashed out and none of the 6 fit, then we go looking for a new image.

- J Greb (talk) 11:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Both the Roux and cv219 image have problems, how about this this--Cameron Scott (talk) 12:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Cameron Scott's suggestion seems better than any of the other choices. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 18:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Brainiac is a problematic character because there have so many incarnations of him. It's quite difficult to find an image of Brainiac's "standard look". However, Cameron Scott's suggestion is good. Nothing fuzzy about the image. It's just Brainiac, green and bald. DCincarnate (talk) 20:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I can live with Cameron's suggested image providing requirements of WP:FUC or whatever we call it now are met, but I agree with J Greb that there needs to be a wider discussion regarding what the info box image is for. Hiding T 22:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I never play with uploading images - if someone can help me with it - I could upload it under FUC? --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Wider than this article, Hiding? Or wider discussion here at this talk page? To the latter end, I go back to the editorial guidelines. "It is felt that using the most universally recognizable appearance of a character, for example Spider-Man in the red and blue rather than some other costume, and using a noteworthy image, either well discussed or used in many other sources, or a promotional piece of artwork the copyright holders have released for promotional purposes fits this purpose best." Taking a look for Brainiac images on Google, it seems to me that the old school images of him with the electrodes on his head are more common and immediately identifiable. While he might not consider an EKG to be a fashion accessory anymore, I think the more traditional look for Brainiac is the way to go for the infobox.

As for a fair use rationale, I'm sure any one of us would be glad to help with that, Cameron. There are a couple of comics-specific FUR templates: {{Comic cover rationale}} and {{Comic panel rationale}}. I also saved a rough draft for my own use which has a few common reasons why a particular image is considered significant. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm agnostic on which image was used, I just suggested that as it was one that didn't have the visual problems of the others suggested. I think the bigger problem (as you correctly raise) is this question of which "version" we should feature - his "look" seems to change every 20 years or so? (and then quite a few in the last ten years). If people can agree on *which* version they want, I'm sure I can find a suitable pose... --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The one you found actually looks like a better fit than either Roux or the current 'box image - as DCI points our it's crisp and clear. It als is evocative of the "classic" look. As far as the image requirements go... It shouldn't be more than 300px across, the templates GG points to are good starting points, and you should include the series and issue you scanned the image from.

As for a "wider discussion", it may be a case of needing to nail down why exactly we've got images in the infoboxes. If that's the case, then it is a discusion for the MoS talk page. - J Greb (talk) 01:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

My thoughts, either:

• One of this era but turned towards the viewer - an internal scan?
• Image:ActionComics544brainiacluthor.jpg but trimmed down to focus on the characters (I'll do this in a bit so people can see what I mean).

It strikes me the latter might be the best as it shows a couple of Brainiacs - which could cover the concerns about his changing image. (Emperor (talk) 03:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC))

I agree with Emperor's suggestion- the image showing multiple Brainiacs would be more appropriate, especially since both of the versions contained in it are pretty iconic in and of themselves. Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I did have a look around for a larger version of the image but couldn't find one, which may mean that if we go with this then we'll need a fresh scan. I will double check to see if I have the issue. (Emperor (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2008 (UTC))

Did you try http://www.comics.org? Or is that forbidden? --GentlemanGhost (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I can provide a larger scan - problem is - the character are hunched over and his left arm is missing... --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

All online images seem to come from the same scan which looks to have some discolouration on it and none of them are large enough to properly trim it down. I did some giggery-pokery and this is what it would look like (just of better quality).

That is just from the material available to us - I suspect we could find a better image from within a comic and I'd suggest going with the classic pink outfit if we can. (Emperor (talk) 19:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC))

Backstory - Real World

Can someone add the info re: who created the character? or anything about his creation? I'd love to know that stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.122.182 (talk) 15:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

DC Universe Online's Brainiac

There isn't much info out there, other than "Brainiac came back".. but it'd be nice to see a section pop up that at least mentions this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.4.68.112 (talk) 04:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Images 2010

There are an over-abuncance non-free images. My suggestion are to trim down images, by removing: File:SupermanCv219.jpg; File:Brainiacs.jpg - as it is superfluous to the Brainiac character; and one of the TAS images (probably the Luthoriac). -Sharp962 (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC).

Brainiacs.jpg can reasonably go - the section include a pointer to the Indigo article, so litle reason to include an image of that character here. And it essentially becomes a plot point issue - it can be covered well enough in the article text.

SupermanCv219.jpg is similar... a limited version of the characters appearance that can be covered in text.

Just a side note, but since the image included present the theme that Brainiac is presented as either robotic looking or as a green skinned alien, it might be reasonable for an image from Smallville to show that James Marsters wasn't required to wear prostetics or massive make-up.

- J Greb (talk) 22:08, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Brainiac A

I think a notable inclusion would be to include details of Brainiac A, the first Brainiac.

See http://www.dcindexes.com/database/story-details.php?storyid=7820

World's Finest Comics #158 Cover Date: June 1966

Briefly, after Robin and Jimmy Olsen discover a secret cave which contains three bottled cities similar to Kandor, it is suspected by Superman that Brainiac was responsible for shrinking the cities. However, it is found that the tThe cities were taken by Brainiac A, a precursor to the evil Brainiac. Brainiac A was not evil and uses the shrink ray to capture and imprison criminals. I believe that the story finishes with the speculation that perhaps one day Brainiac and Brainiac A would perhaps meet. However, I don't think this was ever developed and this story was Brainiac A's only appearance.

Jpmct (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)Jpmct

New 52

The new 52 section looks like it was written by a 3rd grader that writes at a 1st grade level. I made basic spelling adjustments, but the punctuation, structure, and tense is atrocious.129.139.1.69 (talk) 20:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Is Brainiac a weapon of mas destruction? Yes

Brainiac destroys planets once he is done learning about them. If Doomsday counts as a weapon of mass destruction Brainiac; who is usually more robotic than alive should count as a weapon of mass destruction. I doubt the word was ever specifically used though it's a somewhat recent term. CensoredScribe (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Simple but IMPORTANT fix to Third Sentence

The third sentence (entire second 'graph) of the article reads, with no context or explanation:

"'Cirius' or 'Sirius' designed the Brain Interactive Construct at University."

I haven't got any idea what this means, or how it regards Brainiac. Nothing else in the intro illuminated it for me. (I'm not knowledgeable abt. the subject matter.)

Can this sentence be either clarified (for relevance) or deleted?

PS. Perhaps this was a well-meant but vague attempt to address the comment "Backstory - Real World" above?

JChristian88 (talk) 07:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

The "Other Brainiac"

Should we add a "for Brainiac 8 / Indigo, look here" link to the top of this article?

Shotgun Axe Project TAHITI Magical Place 20:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

• How about editors of WP articles? They seem to know everything that is fit to print anyway. --2600:6C48:7006:200:D84D:5A80:173:901D (talk) 04:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)