" 

 == getting each other == 

 yeah! i don't disagree totally with reductions, but to what to reduce. I allways like to leave a flashy generous but not boring introduction in the main page with highlights like enunciating interesting names and controversies but not boring the reader with details... (i had problems to do that for Superman's persdonality and character). More lake catching his interest to make him go to the ""sub-page"". Althoug it does worry me a bit if making to many sub-pages is really helping. I mean, it is still too much memmory and you are not going t be able to catch the wholeness of the topic (lets say batman, or superman) in a small article. The cases i don't care much for are not so relevant controversies like batman's is-he-gay? issue, or superman's case against capt. marvel. Other cases like the bat-embargo i consider more trascendental because it's happening right now... but since not many people are well informed about the issues it implies -some need quotes to for everysingle word, which is not wikipedias requirement as it is simply ""to be veryfiable""...i decided to create a sub page. anyways, i think by now we already know what both our politics are on reducing articles. i hope we can now work toguether to improve our common interests articles. 
 Wait...maybe we should create a minimum expression article about superman lets say like about Darksaid's page size or maybe just twice as big that also serves a a linking summary. i'm talking long term, of couste...we all have lives of our own "