1st Teen Titans 3 3

[Aman619]

I think by then DC was using BB for Batman teamups so it no longer fit the publishing plan. But Showcase was still presenting new ideas and tryouts… and followups.

 

 

Edited August 19, 2015 by aman619

[nearmint]

I think by then DC was using BB for Batman teamups so it no longer fit the publishing plan. But Showcase was still presenting new ideas and tryouts… and followups.

 

 

Good point. (thumbs u

[Silver]

It is interesting how the Titans tryout jumped from BB to Showcase. I can't think of any other tryout that didn't remain within a single title.

 

Cave Carson

[Zonker]

It is interesting how the Titans tryout jumped from BB to Showcase. I can't think of any other tryout that didn't remain within a single title.

 

Cave Carson

 

And Hawkman. From B&B to Mystery in Space to his own mag.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

It is interesting how the Titans tryout jumped from BB to Showcase. I can't think of any other tryout that didn't remain within a single title.

 

Cave Carson

 

Enemy Ace (OOAW and Showcase.)

[RockMyAmadeus]

It is interesting how the Titans tryout jumped from BB to Showcase. I can't think of any other tryout that didn't remain within a single title.

 

Cave Carson

 

And Hawkman. From B&B to Mystery in Space to his own mag.

 

...with a single sojourn in the Atom.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I think by then DC was using BB for Batman teamups so it no longer fit the publishing plan. But Showcase was still presenting new ideas and tryouts and followups.

 

 

B&B was a team-up title starting with issue #50, but it didn't become a Batman team-up title until issue #67.

[JTLarsen]

I also have a FN 54 I bought as part of a collection. When it is listed it will be properly referenced as the Teen Titans origin/prototype.

 

Hmmm. Interestingly, "blazincomics" on ebay calls a coverless copy of BB 54 "origin of Teen Titans," consistent with it being the first appearance of the TT in line with DC and CGC's position, but chooses not to devalue the comic by claiming it is not a TT comic or by calling it a prototype.

 

If you disagree you can instantly discredit me by posting the panel in Brave and the Bold 54 which introduces the world to the Teen Titans.

 

This is a ridiculous and pedantic position. The entire issue of BB54 introduces the world to the new team of Robin, Kid Flash and Speedy (the editors having asked for a "Junior Justice League"), even you admit that when you agree that BB54 is the "origin of the Teen Titans." The last panel of BB54 refers to this "new team." BUT, we all recognize that BB54 doesn't have a blurb saying "Introducing the Teen Titans" for the obvious reason that the name "Teen Titans" hadn't been selected yet. [Of course, BB60 doesn't say "Introducing the Teen Titans" either, because it obviously wasn't the introduction of the team that had appeared six issues earlier.] Just like Animal Man and Ant-Man first appeared without names (or the Fantastic Four without costumes, etc. etc. etc.).

 

Personally, I think you've been thoroughly discredited by DC, CGC, Overstreet, and all of the many dealers who disagree with you by listing BB54 as the first appearance of the Teen Titans. Further, I think your own eBay listing of BB54 discredits you because you list it as the "origin of the Teen Titans" without ever calling it a "prototype" or "not the first appearance of Teen Titans" or any other descriptor that would devalue the issue.

 

Okay, let's try this again.

 

BB54 doesn't introduce the world to "the new team" of Robin, Kid Flash and Speedy. They all appear in the comic together. They never form a team. They never say, "let's create a group" or even "let's work together in the future." If you think they form a team in the story, show us the panel.

 

The name "Teen Titans" isn't selected "yet" because there's nothing to name. They already have names: "Robin," "Speedy" and "Kid Flash." Since they don't form a team, there's nothing to name.

 

The last panel doesn't refer to a "new team" in the context of the story. The "panel" in question is an editorial blurb (as we established earlier) and (as we also established earlier), they routinely referred to any pairing or partnering of heroes as a "team." They might have been a "team" in the small-t sense, the way a taxi driver and I are a team in the effort to get me where I'm going, but they weren't a big-t Team in the sense that they decided to form a group that would exist and regularly reconvene over a sustained period of time.

 

Whether DC, Overstreet or anyone else agrees doesn't matter. As John Oliver puts it, facts don't need people to agree. You might as well ask which number is larger, 5 or 15? Or do owls exist? Or are there hats? Regardless of who agrees, the three heroes who work together in BB54 don't form a superhero team in the sense that any comic book reader would recognize as team formation. If they had, someone would have posted the panel in which that occurs by now. No one has.

 

[JTLarsen]

No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

 

Context matters. You have to read both BB54 and BB60 in context. BB54 introduces an unnamed team of Robin, Kid Flash and Speedy (which we know was originally conceived as a "Junior Justice League"). BB60 names that team and adds a member. The fact that BB60 refers back to BB54 tells you all you need to know about the context of the issues.

 

Under your "reasoning" the first Avengers adventure did not occur until Avengers 2. Because, it is not until the last panel or so of Avengers 1 that the superhero team of Iron Man, Thor, Ant-Man, Wasp, and Hulk decide to call themselves the "Avengers." But, no one is going to buy that Avengers 1 is like Hulk 180, only a last page first appearance of the Avengers with the first "full appearance" coming in Avengers 2.

 

Like I said, you are swimming up stream.

 

I'd give this a rest until you see DC, Overstreet, CGC, and dealers start listing BB54 as a non-Teen Titans book. Not going to happen. Nothing more need to be said.

 

BB54 doesn't introduce anything. If it did, you could show us the panel in which it happens. BB60 refers back to BB54 because some of the Teen Titans appeared in that issue. If you were to show the actual references, everyone would see they clearly establish that BB54 was NOT the first appearance of a new superhero team.

 

Also, unlike the error-riddled, slow-to-correct-itself (see: Rock, Sgt.) Overstreet, here's what comics.org, the single most authoritative online guide to comic books, has to say about BB54:

 

Indexer Notes

Kid Flash, Robin and Aqualad - later to become the Teen Titans.

[JTLarsen]

C'Mon, Man! No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

Still waiting on one, measley panel from 54

 

While you're at it, you better convince everyone that Superman #1 isn't really Superman #1, as it was initially released as a one-shot, and only became a series after it's phenomenal success.

 

What was intended at the time of release isn't relevant. The result is what matters.

 

Yeah, but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Superman is Superman. There is nothing subjective about it. You are arguing that a book is a first appearance which A.) Doesn't mention the team appearing by name and B.) Doesn't include the entire original roster. If BB 54 referred to the Teen Titans and introduced the world to Wonder Girl my argument would have no merit. As it stands, I think my argument holds up pretty well

 

 

 

Not apples and oranges. You're claiming that you can't call BB54 the first Titans appearance simply because they don't call themselves the Titans in that issue. I'm saying you might as well claim that Superman #1 isn't #1 because it doesn't say #1 and wasn't intended to be a continuing series.

 

DC looked at the sucess of BB54 and decided to give the team a name and another issue, just as they looked at the success of the first issue of Superman and decided to publish another. Apples and apples.

 

At this point aren't we just arguing that 54 is a prototype then? When it's this close I think we have to go with the book that establishes clarity and casts away the doubt. You cannot argue that prior to 60 the Teen Titans existed.

Also, I think it's safe to say that after Action Comics #1 anyone who read it had a good idea who Superman was. Apples to oranges. In fact, since the first 13 page story within Action #1 is titled "Superman", Id say you are even making a case for 60 being the first appearance since the example you used clearly identifies the hero chronicled within. ?

 

Wow, you are all over the map. I think your faulty reasoning stems from the misguided notion that we need to freeze time after BB54 came out and look at it within the narrow context of that single issue.

 

We're looking at it in a broader context. A team formed and had an adventure, then 6 issues later another member joined the team and the name of the team was announced. That doesn't negate the fact that their first adventure occurred 6 issues earlier.

 

Nope. No team formed. If they formed, show the panel where they formed. Or the page. Or pages. They worked together, didn't form a team, parted ways without even exchanging email addresses.

[nearmint]

C'Mon, Man! No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

Still waiting on one, measley panel from 54

 

While you're at it, you better convince everyone that Superman #1 isn't really Superman #1, as it was initially released as a one-shot, and only became a series after it's phenomenal success.

 

What was intended at the time of release isn't relevant. The result is what matters.

 

Yeah, but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Superman is Superman. There is nothing subjective about it. You are arguing that a book is a first appearance which A.) Doesn't mention the team appearing by name and B.) Doesn't include the entire original roster. If BB 54 referred to the Teen Titans and introduced the world to Wonder Girl my argument would have no merit. As it stands, I think my argument holds up pretty well

 

 

 

Not apples and oranges. You're claiming that you can't call BB54 the first Titans appearance simply because they don't call themselves the Titans in that issue. I'm saying you might as well claim that Superman #1 isn't #1 because it doesn't say #1 and wasn't intended to be a continuing series.

 

DC looked at the sucess of BB54 and decided to give the team a name and another issue, just as they looked at the success of the first issue of Superman and decided to publish another. Apples and apples.

 

At this point aren't we just arguing that 54 is a prototype then? When it's this close I think we have to go with the book that establishes clarity and casts away the doubt. You cannot argue that prior to 60 the Teen Titans existed.

Also, I think it's safe to say that after Action Comics #1 anyone who read it had a good idea who Superman was. Apples to oranges. In fact, since the first 13 page story within Action #1 is titled "Superman", Id say you are even making a case for 60 being the first appearance since the example you used clearly identifies the hero chronicled within. ?

 

Wow, you are all over the map. I think your faulty reasoning stems from the misguided notion that we need to freeze time after BB54 came out and look at it within the narrow context of that single issue.

 

We're looking at it in a broader context. A team formed and had an adventure, then 6 issues later another member joined the team and the name of the team was announced. That doesn't negate the fact that their first adventure occurred 6 issues earlier.

 

Nope. No team formed. If they formed, show the panel where they formed. Or the page. Or pages. They worked together, didn't form a team, parted ways without even exchanging email addresses.

 

We're getting into semantics here. Let's say I'm a great singer, and on a Saturday night I wander into an open-mic bar and meet a great guitar player, bass player, drummer, and saxophonist, and for the heck of it we perform together and rock the house. Then, the following Tuesday we decide to form a band, call ourselves The Screaming Bejebes, and perform again that night.

 

I would always consider that Saturday night when we first met to be the first time The Screaming Bejebes performed for a crowd. It doesn't matter that we hadn't intended to perform together before we walked into the bar that night, it doesn't matter that we hadn't decided to form a band, or come up with a name to call ourselves. To me all that stuff is secondary to the fact that Saturday was the first time we shared the stage and accomplished something together.

 

You, apparently, would consider the Tuesday to be the first appearance of The Screaming Bejebes. Maybe we're both right, or maybe it's just two different ways, both valid, of looking at the same situation. If it were any more clean-cut than that, as you seem to suggest, then this argument would have been settled years ago.

 

 

[JTLarsen]

Nope. It's pretty clear here early on that something occurred after 54, which led to the teams formation in 60. Once again, this is referenced in the earliest panels addressing the topic, which I am happy to post and share. Seems pretty consistent and on point to me.

 

For the record, the first group of panels you post is from a mid-70s retcon that DC has clearly stated is not accurate on multiple occasions, most recently in celebrating the 50th anniversay of the TT.

 

The second group of panels you post from BB60 confirm that the team was formed prior to BB60 and cites to BB54. That pretty much blows you out of the water. It clearly ties the formation of the TT to BB54. Your problem is that you are so fixated on boosting the value of BB60 that you are not content with BB60 being the first WG and first use of the name TT, you want to call it the first appearance of the TT. But, its not. The origin and first appearance of the team (not the name) is BB54. DC, CGC, Overstreet, dealers, etc. all recognize this. You are swimming upstream against a very hard current.

 

The whole notion of a "tryout" or "prototype" does not help you here at all.

 

A "prototype" is a marketing term used by dealers to overclaim the value of a book. E.g. when Dr. Occult puts on a cape, dealers claim it was a "Superman prototype," even though Superman pre-dated Dr. Occult and aside from the cape and artist the concepts have nothing in common. And don't get me started on all the fake Atlas-Marvel "prototypes." But, in any event, BB54 is in no way shape or form a "prototype."

 

A "tryout" is when a publisher tests the market with a one-shot or other finite appearance to see if a concept will fly. Showcase No. 4 was a "tryout." And guess what? It, as with all "tryouts," was a first appearance and origin. BB54 is a tryout. So is BB60 for that matter. And just like Showcase Nos. 4, 8, 13-14 led to Flash getting his own series, BB54, BB60 and Showcase 59 led to the TT getting their own series.

 

How do we know BB54 was a tryout? How do you know they were specifically testing to see whether readers wanted to see those heroes in a formal team in the future? (More than any other issue is a "tryout" in the sense that if it gets great response, the publisher may act on it.)

 

In other words, a prototype is identifiable externally. We can see for ourselves that something represents an early incarnation of a later thing. To claim something is a tryout you need to have evidence of intent. Where is that? Did they reveal it in the letters column? E.g., "Do you want to see these kids together again...?" That sort of thing.

[JTLarsen]

C'Mon, Man! No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

Still waiting on one, measley panel from 54

 

While you're at it, you better convince everyone that Superman #1 isn't really Superman #1, as it was initially released as a one-shot, and only became a series after it's phenomenal success.

 

What was intended at the time of release isn't relevant. The result is what matters.

 

Yeah, but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Superman is Superman. There is nothing subjective about it. You are arguing that a book is a first appearance which A.) Doesn't mention the team appearing by name and B.) Doesn't include the entire original roster. If BB 54 referred to the Teen Titans and introduced the world to Wonder Girl my argument would have no merit. As it stands, I think my argument holds up pretty well

 

 

 

Not apples and oranges. You're claiming that you can't call BB54 the first Titans appearance simply because they don't call themselves the Titans in that issue. I'm saying you might as well claim that Superman #1 isn't #1 because it doesn't say #1 and wasn't intended to be a continuing series.

 

DC looked at the sucess of BB54 and decided to give the team a name and another issue, just as they looked at the success of the first issue of Superman and decided to publish another. Apples and apples.

 

At this point aren't we just arguing that 54 is a prototype then? When it's this close I think we have to go with the book that establishes clarity and casts away the doubt. You cannot argue that prior to 60 the Teen Titans existed.

Also, I think it's safe to say that after Action Comics #1 anyone who read it had a good idea who Superman was. Apples to oranges. In fact, since the first 13 page story within Action #1 is titled "Superman", Id say you are even making a case for 60 being the first appearance since the example you used clearly identifies the hero chronicled within. ?

 

Wow, you are all over the map. I think your faulty reasoning stems from the misguided notion that we need to freeze time after BB54 came out and look at it within the narrow context of that single issue.

 

We're looking at it in a broader context. A team formed and had an adventure, then 6 issues later another member joined the team and the name of the team was announced. That doesn't negate the fact that their first adventure occurred 6 issues earlier.

 

Nope. No team formed. If they formed, show the panel where they formed. Or the page. Or pages. They worked together, didn't form a team, parted ways without even exchanging email addresses.

 

We're getting into semantics here. Let's say I'm a great singer, and on a Saturday night I wander into an open-mic bar and meet a great guitar player, bass player, drummer, and saxophonist, and for the heck of it we perform together and rock the house. Then, the following Tuesday we decide to form a band, call ourselves The Screaming Bejebes, and perform again that night.

 

I would always consider that Saturday night when we first met to be the first time The Screaming Bejebes performed for a crowd. It doesn't matter that we hadn't intended to perform together before we walked into the bar that night, it doesn't matter that we hadn't decided to form a band, or come up with a name to call ourselves. To me all that stuff is secondary to the fact that Saturday was the first time we shared the stage and accomplished something together.

 

You, apparently, would consider the Tuesday to be the first appearance of The Screaming Bejebes. Maybe we're both right, or maybe it's just two different ways, both valid, of looking at the same situation. If it were any more clean-cut than that, as you seem to suggest, then this argument would have been settled years ago.

 

I think it's a useful analogy, but an imperfect one. Performances aren't physical objects. You can't "collect" a performance (aside from recordings, obvi). And even if we do accept your analogy, by your reasoning, the world would consider the first time that The Quarrymen included Lennon, McCartney and Harrison in its ranks as the first appearance (or performance) of The Beatles. Which they don't.

 

A prototype, maybe!

[nearmint]

C'Mon, Man! No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

Still waiting on one, measley panel from 54

 

While you're at it, you better convince everyone that Superman #1 isn't really Superman #1, as it was initially released as a one-shot, and only became a series after it's phenomenal success.

 

What was intended at the time of release isn't relevant. The result is what matters.

 

Yeah, but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Superman is Superman. There is nothing subjective about it. You are arguing that a book is a first appearance which A.) Doesn't mention the team appearing by name and B.) Doesn't include the entire original roster. If BB 54 referred to the Teen Titans and introduced the world to Wonder Girl my argument would have no merit. As it stands, I think my argument holds up pretty well

 

 

 

Not apples and oranges. You're claiming that you can't call BB54 the first Titans appearance simply because they don't call themselves the Titans in that issue. I'm saying you might as well claim that Superman #1 isn't #1 because it doesn't say #1 and wasn't intended to be a continuing series.

 

DC looked at the sucess of BB54 and decided to give the team a name and another issue, just as they looked at the success of the first issue of Superman and decided to publish another. Apples and apples.

 

At this point aren't we just arguing that 54 is a prototype then? When it's this close I think we have to go with the book that establishes clarity and casts away the doubt. You cannot argue that prior to 60 the Teen Titans existed.

Also, I think it's safe to say that after Action Comics #1 anyone who read it had a good idea who Superman was. Apples to oranges. In fact, since the first 13 page story within Action #1 is titled "Superman", Id say you are even making a case for 60 being the first appearance since the example you used clearly identifies the hero chronicled within. ?

 

Wow, you are all over the map. I think your faulty reasoning stems from the misguided notion that we need to freeze time after BB54 came out and look at it within the narrow context of that single issue.

 

We're looking at it in a broader context. A team formed and had an adventure, then 6 issues later another member joined the team and the name of the team was announced. That doesn't negate the fact that their first adventure occurred 6 issues earlier.

 

Nope. No team formed. If they formed, show the panel where they formed. Or the page. Or pages. They worked together, didn't form a team, parted ways without even exchanging email addresses.

 

We're getting into semantics here. Let's say I'm a great singer, and on a Saturday night I wander into an open-mic bar and meet a great guitar player, bass player, drummer, and saxophonist, and for the heck of it we perform together and rock the house. Then, the following Tuesday we decide to form a band, call ourselves The Screaming Bejebes, and perform again that night.

 

I would always consider that Saturday night when we first met to be the first time The Screaming Bejebes performed for a crowd. It doesn't matter that we hadn't intended to perform together before we walked into the bar that night, it doesn't matter that we hadn't decided to form a band, or come up with a name to call ourselves. To me all that stuff is secondary to the fact that Saturday was the first time we shared the stage and accomplished something together.

 

You, apparently, would consider the Tuesday to be the first appearance of The Screaming Bejebes. Maybe we're both right, or maybe it's just two different ways, both valid, of looking at the same situation. If it were any more clean-cut than that, as you seem to suggest, then this argument would have been settled years ago.

 

I think it's a useful analogy, but an imperfect one. Performances aren't physical objects. You can't "collect" a performance (aside from recordings, obvi). And even if we do accept your analogy, by your reasoning, the world would consider the first time that The Quarrymen included Lennon, McCartney and Harrison in its ranks as the first appearance (or performance) of The Beatles. Which they don't.

 

A prototype, maybe!

 

No, that's not my reasoning at all. In my analogy, you have four distinct people coming together to accomplish a goal, a performance. In BB54, the goal is to save the kidnapped teenagers from Mr Twister. The two scenarios are comparable.

 

In your Quarrymen analogy, an established band, or team, changes their name. That's a horse of a different color, and not comparable.

[Zonker]

C'Mon, Man! No one in their right mind could read through 54 only, finish the story, and proclaim that is the first appearance of the Teen Titans. It's just another team up, consistent with others that occur within the same time frame in the title, until BB 60, which introduces the team that was created after the team up in 54. At least that's how Robin tells it to Batman in BB 60.

Still waiting on one, measley panel from 54

 

While you're at it, you better convince everyone that Superman #1 isn't really Superman #1, as it was initially released as a one-shot, and only became a series after it's phenomenal success.

 

What was intended at the time of release isn't relevant. The result is what matters.

 

Yeah, but that's an apples to oranges comparison. Superman is Superman. There is nothing subjective about it. You are arguing that a book is a first appearance which A.) Doesn't mention the team appearing by name and B.) Doesn't include the entire original roster. If BB 54 referred to the Teen Titans and introduced the world to Wonder Girl my argument would have no merit. As it stands, I think my argument holds up pretty well

 

 

 

Not apples and oranges. You're claiming that you can't call BB54 the first Titans appearance simply because they don't call themselves the Titans in that issue. I'm saying you might as well claim that Superman #1 isn't #1 because it doesn't say #1 and wasn't intended to be a continuing series.

 

DC looked at the sucess of BB54 and decided to give the team a name and another issue, just as they looked at the success of the first issue of Superman and decided to publish another. Apples and apples.

 

At this point aren't we just arguing that 54 is a prototype then? When it's this close I think we have to go with the book that establishes clarity and casts away the doubt. You cannot argue that prior to 60 the Teen Titans existed.

Also, I think it's safe to say that after Action Comics #1 anyone who read it had a good idea who Superman was. Apples to oranges. In fact, since the first 13 page story within Action #1 is titled "Superman", Id say you are even making a case for 60 being the first appearance since the example you used clearly identifies the hero chronicled within. ?

 

Wow, you are all over the map. I think your faulty reasoning stems from the misguided notion that we need to freeze time after BB54 came out and look at it within the narrow context of that single issue.

 

We're looking at it in a broader context. A team formed and had an adventure, then 6 issues later another member joined the team and the name of the team was announced. That doesn't negate the fact that their first adventure occurred 6 issues earlier.

 

Nope. No team formed. If they formed, show the panel where they formed. Or the page. Or pages. They worked together, didn't form a team, parted ways without even exchanging email addresses.

 

We're getting into semantics here. Let's say I'm a great singer, and on a Saturday night I wander into an open-mic bar and meet a great guitar player, bass player, drummer, and saxophonist, and for the heck of it we perform together and rock the house. Then, the following Tuesday we decide to form a band, call ourselves The Screaming Bejebes, and perform again that night.

 

I would always consider that Saturday night when we first met to be the first time The Screaming Bejebes performed for a crowd. It doesn't matter that we hadn't intended to perform together before we walked into the bar that night, it doesn't matter that we hadn't decided to form a band, or come up with a name to call ourselves. To me all that stuff is secondary to the fact that Saturday was the first time we shared the stage and accomplished something together.

 

You, apparently, would consider the Tuesday to be the first appearance of The Screaming Bejebes. Maybe we're both right, or maybe it's just two different ways, both valid, of looking at the same situation. If it were any more clean-cut than that, as you seem to suggest, then this argument would have been settled years ago.

 

I think it's a useful analogy, but an imperfect one. Performances aren't physical objects. You can't "collect" a performance (aside from recordings, obvi). And even if we do accept your analogy, by your reasoning, the world would consider the first time that The Quarrymen included Lennon, McCartney and Harrison in its ranks as the first appearance (or performance) of The Beatles. Which they don't.

 

A prototype, maybe!

 

So... Wonder Girl is... Ringo?

[HighStakesComics]

No Wonder Girl til 60, Nearmint.

[nearmint]

No Wonder Girl til 60, Nearmint.

 

No Wonder Woman til All-Star 8. Does that mean there was no Justice Society in All-Star 3-7?

[HighStakesComics]

No Wonder Girl til 60, Nearmint.

 

No Wonder Woman til All-Star 8. Does that mean there was no Justice Society in All-Star 3-7?

 

The Justice Society was called the Justice Society before Wonder Woman came along. The Titans on the other hand......

[nearmint]

No Wonder Girl til 60, Nearmint.

 

No Wonder Woman til All-Star 8. Does that mean there was no Justice Society in All-Star 3-7?

 

The Justice Society was called the Justice Society before Wonder Woman came along. The Titans on the other hand......

 

So what's the qualification for a first appearance, having a team name, or the roster?

[HighStakesComics]

No Wonder Girl til 60, Nearmint.

 

No Wonder Woman til All-Star 8. Does that mean there was no Justice Society in All-Star 3-7?

 

The Justice Society was called the Justice Society before Wonder Woman came along. The Titans on the other hand......

 

So what's the qualification for a first appearance, having a team name, or the roster?

 

In this case? Both.