Thread:Undoniel/@comment-5270921-20190224042313/@comment-4651179-20190227134354

Edkaufman, sorry but I had missed your last reply.

Just to clarify this again, my main argument is not to do as Marvel tells. I have already mentioned that I have my own personal parameters for why I wouldn't credit Herb Trimpe with Wolverine's creation. I have also pointed out several times that, yes, Roy Thomas believes Herb Trimpe co-created Wolverine, but the alleged co-creator himself didn't believe that was the case.

As for the adaptation of pre-existing characters, I personally don't know how does crediting work for those cases. I can see both a reason for crediting and not crediting the adaptors. A reason for crediting would be that the adaptations can be considered new characters in a way. Like Copeinator said, they are not the original characters themselves. A reason I'd understand for not crediting adaptors is that the character was still conceived by the original creator, and the adaptors are, after all, only adpating it.

However, I still think that saying "Roy Thomas co-created Marvel's adaptation of Conan" is not incorrect. After all, Conan (Earth-616) is an article for Marvel's Conan and not the original Conan.

That being said, am I being a hypocrite for suggesting to keep adaptors listed as co-creators of characters like Conan or Dracula or Fu Manchu while I reject the idea of listing Herb Trimpe as a co-creator of Wolverine? I wouldn't say so. I think it'd be a mistake to say that the two cases are comparable. After all, characters like Marvel's Conan are an adaptation of pre-existing characters, whereas Wolverine is an original character on his own. That difference brings a lot of nuances to the table.