Talk:Intercompany crossover

Please go to

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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Are Miscellaneous Crossovers unpublished? Duggy 1138 (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Spider-man (2002), a DC-comics character (Superman) is referenced in the Marvel-comics film via the line, "You do too much; you're not Superman." Would that be enough to count as an Intercompany crossover in film? MarkoOhNo (talk) 10:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Marvel character Buried Alien (Fastforward) be included? It is somewhat similar to Marvel's Mantis & DC's Willow. While Barry Allen was dead/in the speed force) over in DC, Buried Alien made a couple appearances over in Marvel. Just like with Mantis at DC, Everything suggested this was Barry. Even called him fastest man alive. Marvel wikia explains it very well. However this also raises another question... Are there more characters like Mantis/Willow & Barry Allen/Buried Alien that can be listed? Yeah of course be insane to try and include other companies parodies. The comical ones or such as the very Justice League like team that Marvel's Illuminati (in their New Avengers title). This team, The Great Society, clearly never was intented to be the Justice League but a parody of them. Buried Alien & Willow are almost like backdoor crossovers. They happen in canon, written so these characters could have travelled to that reality, issues are filled with direct hints who they really are, and importantly they both continue what happened with the character (With DC's wonky timelines... Buried Allen was in line with Pre-Final Crisis explaination where Barry was trapped in the Speed Force). But of course never outright say it. I can try and find some more of these if should be included.--Jp0d009 (talk) 23:15, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070925035550/http://forum.newsarama.com:80/showthread.php?t=125014 to http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=125014

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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.—

As it stands, this article is becoming an indiscriminate collection of crossovers. May I suggest we split off a List of notable intercompany crossovers, and reduce the number listed. Killer Moff (talk) 17:18, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This should definitely be split up. I would support a List of DC–Marvel intercompany crossovers and List of video game intercompany crossovers, which are probably the two biggest categories on the page. Maybe List of DC intercompany crossovers and List of Marvel intercompany crossovers could be created for the DC-X and Marvel-X crossovers, and maybe another list for non-DC/Marvel crossovers. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 20:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://everything2.com/title/Superman%20and%20Spider-man
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/10/30/rutland-halloween-parade-marvel-dc-crossover/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2010/10/01/comic-book-legends-revealed-280/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2005/09/15/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-16/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150906141738/http://comicsalliance.com/spider-man-red-sonja-1-sells-out/ to http://comicsalliance.com/spider-man-red-sonja-1-sells-out/

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.

• 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) 21:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The video games section includes a strictly TV crossover from "Mathlete's Feat", and possibly other film/TV crossovers. These need a separate section. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 01:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The film rights to Spider-Man are owned by Sony's Columbia Pictures. Do the MCU films with Spider-Man count as intercompany crossovers? --LegerPrime (talk) 03:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How are the "Miscellaneous crossovers" any different than the other comic book crossovers? If there are no objections, I will be merging them with the rest of the list. --114.77.142.146 (talk) 07:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this way, heroes originally published by different companies can become part of the same fictional universe, and interactions between such characters are no longer considered intercompany crossovers.

This sentence is being used to justify the removal of the Conan/Marvel crossovers from the list. However, this sentence refers to DC's purchase of the characters Captain Marvel, Plastic Man and Captain Atom. Since these characters are now owned by DC, interactions between such characters are indeed not intercompany crossovers. Marvel did NOT purchase Conan. Marvel licensed Conan, so any interactions between Conan and Marvel characters are still intercompany crossovers. They should be re-instated.

An example of a crossover that should be removed is Vampirella vs. Purgatori (2021) because both characters are now owned by Dynamite Entertainment. --58.105.78.220 (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It does not only pertain to characters being purchased and used within a company’s titles. It also pertains to characters being licensed and used. The section you’ve quoted above actually starts with the words, “Characters are often licensed or sold from one company to another…” The key words there are “licensed or sold.” Captain Marvel (Shazam) was also a licensed character between 1972 and 1991. DC’s eventual purchase of the character has no relevance to the discussion. By your reasoning, every appearance by that character in a DC comic during that time would also be a inter-company crossover. Also, every Rom, Micronauts, Team America, Godzilla, Shogun Warriors, and US1 story published by Marvel during the 1970s and 1980s would also be intercompany crossover due to them being owned by toy and film companies and having interactions with Marvel’s characters as well as their own stories taking place within Marvel’s continuity. They’re not. Conan’s Marvel stories, during both runs, have always been part of Marvel’s fictional universe, even if remotely, making them not crossovers by definition.

The companies referred to in the article’s definition of intercompany refer to, or at least SHOULD refer to, the publishing companies and their properties as well as their licensed properties. If one publisher owns two licensed properties and has them meet, it’s not an intercompany crossover. If two different publishers own licenses to two separate properties owned by one company, like Hasbro owning GI Joe and Transformers, and has them meet that IS an intercompany crossover as two separate publishers are working together.

As far as Vampirella and Purgatori being removed, as far as I can tell, we agree. There are numerous others that should probably also be removed as well. Perhaps a reasonable solution for many of these cases would be to create a separate section/list of titles that are more an example of an interfranchise crossover. These would be titles that cross two properties owned or licensed by the publisher releasing said title. This would be most appropriate for the titles like Die!namite which features all Dynamite owned or licensed characters, or even the various DC meets Hanna-Barbera or Looney Toons characters, all three of which are actually owned by Warner Bros. I’d say inclusion of the Marvel Conan books are still questionable there though because, like the licensed toy characters I mentioned above, their stories still remain part of Marvel’s universe even if the characters themselves are no longer able to be used.NJZombie (talk) 15:19, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even crossovers involving two different publishers often treat the characters as existing in the same fictional universe.

The list would probably be only half as long as it currently is if it conformed to your narrow definition of an intercompany crossover. What's the point of having a list at all if it's not going to have everything that might be considered an intercompany crossover? I do think Marvel's Rom, Micronauts and Godzilla comics should be on the list. Shang-Chi too since Fu Manchu is a licensed character. A list should be as complete as possible. --58.105.78.220 (talk) 02:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are not meant to be long run on lists of information. That’s typically frowned upon to begin with. The list could actually use additional trimming based on that fact alone. However, I suggested an option that would allow most titles to be included under a subcategory. That seems to have been ignored though. Intercompany crossovers have always referred to two publishers working together, starting with the first Marvel/DC collaboration, The Wizard of Oz, which had nothing to do with characters owned by either company and everything to do with two publishers working together. Oh yeah, and most one-off or short term crossovers DO NOT treat the stories as happening in their respective companies’ mainstream canon universes, which is also directly addressed in the article. NJZombie (talk) 02:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you said "separate section/list of titles" for interfranchise crossovers, did you mean a separate article or a different section in the same article? --58.105.78.220 (talk) 03:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Separate section, same article. It would explain that sometimes two different franchises, owned by separate corporate entities but licensed by a single publisher, meet for a crossover and would explain that this is more of an interfranchise crossover. That would include titles like Die!namite Groo vs Conan and Tarzan. It would not include the Marvel Conan, Micronauts, Rom, etc because those still follow the same rule as being part of the Marvel Universe and not considered a true crossover. All this being said, this is simply a suggestion and attempt at a compromise. It doesn’t mean other editors will agree and give consensus to its addition. NJZombie (talk) 03:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the whole list should be redefined as "List of crossovers in comics" and avoid the whole ownership/publisher issue. We already have a List of crossovers in video games article that lists all video game crossovers, not just intercompany ones. --58.105.78.220 (talk) 08:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the goal is not to change the subject to accommodate an exhaustive list, but rather to streamline the list to fit the existing subject. NJZombie (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page as it currently stands is comically useless. It is literally just two sentences at this point. It keeps getting edited down to bare bones knowledge that anyone could guess by the title of the page. As it was before, it was a little messy, but still had pertinent information the average person might now know, such as lists of comic book intercompany crossovers. Now, it's just a tiny page with nothing of substance at all. Daffy0211 (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't a place to make long indiscriminate lists. The sort of craft that formerly appeared here might belong on fan sites somewhere, but not here.

MrOllie (talk) 02:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]