What I personally object to in comics is the "meta-origin." One of the more entertaining parts of comics is the diverse (sometimes absurdly diverse) ideas that go into it, and the writers who come along to say that all of that is wrong, and everybody's origin is "really" some ancient artifact, say, buried in Siberia? Well, suddenly your universe of hundreds of titles across most of a century seems small and boring.
If I remember correctly, James Robinson's "The Golden Age" (which bored me to tears with cliches) had the most egregious example, trying to link every superhero origin to Starman, even claiming that the unpowered "mystery men" were mentally unbalanced (another common offense--wanting to help people means you're crazy, to some writers) by the same event.
Likewise, there was DC's ill-advised "Invasion!" crossover, where we learned that something like a sixth of humanity have the X-Fa--I mean "meta-gene.
(And, as I've mentioned, I'm also not fond of leading with the origin when introducing a character. There are very few cases where pages of a callow twit stumbling into powers and learning that he should be responsible is more engaging than actually seeing him solve problems. I think a lot of the listed characters could have been improved substantially by telling the story in a brief flashback at the end of the first story.
Granted, we're talking about splitting hairs, but what's more interesting? Having someone tell you that, oh, he fell out of his chair and spent the night huffing fumes or watching the "drama" unfold?