This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
The various exhibits listed in
Marvel Cinematic Universe#Outside media aren't following the MoS, but I'm not sure which category they fall under.
MOS:MAJORWORK#Major works says to italic Named exhibitions (artistic, historical, scientific, educational, cultural, literary, etc. – generally hosted by, or part of, an existing institution such as a museum or gallery), but not large-scale exhibition events or individual exhibits
, and
MOS:MINORWORK#Quotation marks says to add quotes to Exhibits (specific) within a larger exhibition
.
The exhibits in the section are: Iron Man Tech Presented by Stark Industries, Thor: Treasures of Asgard, Captain America: The Living Legend and Symbol of Courage, Avengers S.T.A.T.I.O.N. and Marvel: Creating the Cinematic Universe. -- Gonnym ( talk) 07:50, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
named exhibition... hosted by... an existing institution(GOMA). The Iron Man, Thor, and Cap exhibits at Disneyland would be minor I think, since they were part of the Innoventions attraction. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 15:14, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
What's the point of them? They appear randomly chosen, and don't correspond to anything else in the article... Argento Surfer ( talk) 20:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
As the title says, Rhodey/ War Machine played by Terrence Howard (Iron Man) and Don Cheadle (rest of the films) is missing. δα ωλα ( talk) 09:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The TV series from old Marvel studios are not referenced in the MCU, are they a part of it? Halbared ( talk) 21:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Why isn't Robert Downey, Jr. in the list of recurring characters? Chris Evans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6011:AE05:808:89FF:C0ED:93D8:43EF ( talk) 02:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Fantastic Four to unnanounced phase 139.180.29.241 ( talk) 01:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Shouldn't this go under the section titled "Live-action television specials", since it's not actually a series but a TV special? Rafaelchan118 ( talk) 17:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Blade and Fantastic Four to upcoming movies. While Fantastic Four's release is TBA, Blade was reported as releasing before Captain Marvel 2 ( https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/marvel-studios-confirms-blade-release-captain-marvel-2/). RojManVB ( talk) 00:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Peter's To Do List is Marvel's sixth One-Shot. Add this to One-Shot list. Besides upcoming The Guardians Of The Galaxy Holiday Special is a SPECIAL not a TV show and I Am Groot isn't One-Shot, it's an animated short TV series. Create new categories for them please. İh2055 ( talk) 17:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, i have one more offer. What If...? is an animated show then why it's shown in the list of TV series, it's an animated TV show, create special category for it and show that it's the part of Phase 4. İh2055 ( talk) 08:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Peter's To Do List should at least be listed separately in short film like I Am Groot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.84.115.136 ( talk) 08:45, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I think that we should remove the 2022 release date por the new Ant-Man film, there isn't a direct source and the Marvel's 2022 slate is so crowded, it's impossible that they would have more films. It will be 2023 I think, but we should write just TBA. 31.131.176.228 ( talk) 16:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Marvel Studios: Legends should be added in Disney+ Series.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.84.115.136 ( talk) 10:23, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Add Peter's To Do List and Marvel Studios: Legends to Other Media İh2055 ( talk) 20:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
The Daily Bugle YouTube channel found at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGfq7EcxdrDN9hSo-iOaSxg should be added under digital series. It's relatively similar to the WHIH Newsfront youtube channel, and J.K. Simmons is already credited under recurring characters in the section on that, so I see no reason this should be excluded 2603:6010:AF01:AC00:E919:5A49:288F:A33A ( talk) 15:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
With WandaVision premiering in just over a week, I have gone ahead and published Vision (Marvel Cinematic Universe). It still needs some content on the reception of the character/performance, if anyone has a finger on sources for that purpose. BD2412 T 20:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Didn't Kevin Feige confirm Deadpool 3 in the MCU? Should that be put in the future movie section? TonyStank123456789 ( talk) 04:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
adding Deadpool 3 in development on future Lukemegner ( talk) 09:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
MCU films are famously categorised into phases, typically ended by an Avengers movie, where they are grouped by relative chronoligical appearance and plot importance shouldn't the four (and future) phases be described in a subsection? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VN28 ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
These 2 were confirmed but they are not here at Future section in Feature films in a different phase (unannounced phase). Why are they excluded? Kohcohf ( talk) 16:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Why Marvel's The Avengers, not The Avengers? If you including title to one of them then why you don't add it to all of them? İh2055 ( talk) 09:50, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Also, to expand upon it, it's also likely because there are multiple unrelated/non-Marvel films called the Avengers as well, and so they may not want to, at a glance, have someone confusing between those the Avengers and the Marvel the Avengers. They don't have that confusion with Daredevil or Punisher because they are not only Marvel, but the MCU has them as TV shows while when they weren't MCU produced they were only films. I do agree that the "Marvel's" part of it isn't actually/shouldn't be part of the title (as it's like saying "DC's Superman" or "Universal's Godzilla", etc. where it's not actually part of the title, just a notation, for lack of a better term, to inform that this is the Studio making this movie, like which "the Avengers" is it, it's specifically the Marvel one, if that makes any sense), but I do understand why they have it the way they do. 45.51.166.54 ( talk) 17:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
When searching for the Marvel Cinematic Universe Wikipedia page, the picture associated with the home page is Joss Wheaton, if possible please change it to Kevin Feige.
Joss is a controversial figure and in my mind does not deserve to be the face of the Marvel Cinematic Universe on Wikipedia. He has only directed 2 of the 20+ movies, while Kevin Feige has been the driving force of the entire franchise. 2601:681:800:3580:D029:3084:847D:692B ( talk) 00:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
During his opening statement on the investor's day, Feige said that the MCU consisted of 23 films, which would now be expanded into the TV shows as well. It clearly means that Marvel TV is officially non-canon. Could someone explain why they are still on this page? Anubhab030119 ( talk) 20:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay thanks for the answer guys. Hope to soon find some clarification either way from Marvel Studios. Anubhab030119 ( talk) 01:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
AS OF NOW, Marvel TV is still canon, Anubhab030119, so FOR NOW you are not correct (though for some shows you very well might be). Feige has previously acknowledged that the shows are canon to the MCU, and what he now means is that they are creating shows that (one) are made by Marvel Studios and (two) interconnect with the shows and movies. The Marvel Television shows connected with the films, but the films never connected with them. In that same mindset, the shows have been marketed as being connected to the MCU previously. However, we do not know Marvel Studios plans and they could use characters for other purposes in the MCU. Here's the deal with continuity in the MCU and how we know if shows are or are not canon. Right now, every show thought to be canon is canon. Many rumors point to Charlie Cox aka Matt Murdock being in the upcoming Spider-Man film this December, and if this is true along with other rumors that other Marvel Netflix characters will be returning to the MCU starting in this film, then all these films can be considered canon. If this ends up being the case for ALL of the Netflix shows, then Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, The Defenders and The Punisher all remain canon. Cloak & Dagger has a few small but important connections with the Netflix shows, so if any of the Netflix shows were to be considered canon, they would take Cloak & Dagger, and Runaways which connects to Cloak & Dagger, with it. If Runaways was considered non-canon but Cloak & Dagger was not, than Runaways and the Netflix shows would remain canon, but Runaways wouldn't. If Cloak & Dagger was proved non-canon but Runaways wasn't, then Cloak & Dagger AND Runaways would both be considered non-canon, however the Netflix shows can exist without Cloak & Dagger and Runaways, but Cloak & Dagger and Runaways not without the Netflix shows. See what I'm getting at here? Alright. As you can see, the Netflix and MCU young adult shows are very closely connected and depend on each other very much, but what about the other shows? If Helstrom or any of it's characters are used in a way that contradicts the show's events in the MCU, then the show will be considered non-canon. If Inhumans (which I believe will be the one show that will end up being non-canon by the end of this year) or any of its characters (the Inhuman Royal Family) are used in a contradicting way in the MCU going forward, then they will be considered non-canon.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Agent Carter remain in a pretty safe zone for now. Agent Carter is the one show that has little risk of becoming non-canon as it was already confirmed continuity in the 2019 film Avengers: Endgame with the Edwin Jarvis cameo. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. has a bit more risk. If Hive, Gravitron, or the Shrike were used in a contradicting way in the MCU films, then the show can be considered non-canon. Same goes with Quake. However, if rumors about Quake in future MCU content are true, then we might have confirmation that the show is canon to the MCU.
I think that the Inhuman Royal Family will be rebooted; likely in the show Ms. Marvel which comes out this fall; which would make Inhumans not canon. We could very well see Netflix/young-adult confirmation or decanonization by the end of 2021 so that debate should be settled, and possibly Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. by the end of 2022, with Helstrom a possibility in the next few years (it looks like Agent Carter will always remain safe), and by 2023 this debate can be ended. But for now, all the shows ARE canon, but they are all subject to change anytime soon. I hope this answers all your questions about this Anubhab030119. I know it's alot and I'm sorry, but it's the best way to get a good explanation out. IronMan287 ( talk) 04:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)IronMan287 IronMan287 ( talk) 04:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
IronMan287 that's an very impressive answer brother. Thanks a lot for taking so much time to provide such a detailed explanation. I too hope that this debate ends sooner rather than later. Cheers. Anubhab030119 ( talk) 08:18, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Agreed Anubhab. Great stuff. Personally I do think they are all canon in this timeline (Maybe not Inhumans like IronMan mentioned). The only one that would actually be hard to be cano is Agents Of Shield. Long story but basically the Snap doesn’t happen for some reason in AOS but Infinity War is referenced before. This makes it clear it’s in a different timeline but does it mean they are non-canon? Nah. What it means in my opinion is that it’s part of the Multiverse and is a branch of the timeline blah blah lol. It’s best to say they are all canon. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I have a few edits to the timeline section I think I should make. I've been researching the MCU for a while with a good number of fans who have interests similar to mine, and we have done some deep digging into the timeline of the MCU. You can check out our work on this page: https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline and the linked decade or year pages found on that page, in which we have detailed explanations throughout the reference sections.
I would not like to change anything it says, but instead add on our discovered and sensible timeline of the MCU films; providing evidence as needed. This does include lots of similarities with the released timeline however, though the beginning is the only thing that really differs/ I'll include the edits that I want to make that are different than what Marvel Studios has already established using my already discovered evidence; also the fact that Marvel films often take place around their release dates, with exception of flashback films, Iron Man-Thor, Iron Man 3, GOTG Vol. 2, Black Panther and all films Avengers: Endgame and beyond:
- Captain America: The First Avenger (1943-1945)
- Captain Marvel (1995)
- Iron Man (May-November 2009)
- Iron Man 2 (May 2010)
- The Incredible Hulk (May-Early June, 2010)
- Thor (Late May-Early June, 2010) - note: Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk and Thor's big battles take place mostly during the same week as evidence in the comic book tie-in Fury's Big Week
- The Avengers (May 2012)
- Iron Man 3 (December 2012, leads into first few days of 2013)
- Thor: The Dark World (November 2013, but the prologue takes place right after The Avengers in 2012)
- Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Early 2014; likely January)
- Guardians of the Galaxy (August 2014)
- Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (October 2014)
- Avengers: Age of Ultron (April 2015)
- Ant-Man (July 2015)
- Doctor Strange (takes place from February 2016-February 2017)
- Captain America: Civil War (May 2016)
- Black Panther (a few weeks after Civil War, likely June 2016)
- Spider-Man: Homecoming (a couple months after Civil War, start of school year; September-October 2016)
- Thor: Ragnarok (November 2017)
- Ant-Man and the Wasp (Majority of film takes place in early May 2018)
- Avengers: Infinity War (Late May 2018)
- Avengers: Endgame (Prologue takes place a couple weeks after Infinity War in late June 2018)
- Avengers: Endgame time jump (October 2023)
- WandaVision (Three weeks after snap, which mid-October, putting it around early to mid November 2023)
- Spider-Man: Far From Home (Takes place in June 2024, post-credits scene at the start of July 2024)
I really hope this explanation can help people really figure out the MCU timeline. If you need me to provide what I would say in the timeline section and my explanations for certain parts of the timeline, I will gladly do so! IronMan287 ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)IronMan287 IronMan287 ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Timeline makes more sense for it’s article in my opinion. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes, me, the same person wrote these two edits and the origininal post lol
Obviously a lot of things in the movies happen simultaneously and the problem people have with chronology is that you can't really watch them at the same time, the same goes for scenes in a movie, you want a chronology but in any movie, a lot of scenes happen at the same time but you get stuck in your mind that it is happening linear. Anyway it goes without saying that these movies is always best watched in production order then you have to "fill in the blanks" as you go. With that said there is now just confusion on the mcu wikipage after Disneyplus mashes "their order" up for the "best timeline experience".
Since disneyplus is sticking to a new timeline order you should rearrange it in the list on the mcu page:
1943–1945 The First Avenger (2010-2012 present scenes, I always took it to be just before Avengers, but the post credit scene of Iron Man, "you think you are the only hero", well it can be anywhere really before or after Iron Man that Steve wakes up from iced. 1946 Agent Carter
1989-1995 Captain Marvel
2010 Iron Man 2011 Iron Man 2 The Incredible Hulk The Consultant (THIS FITS BEST AFTER HULK as it ties with the post credits scene of Hulk, but I guess you could say Tony Stark visits Gen. Ross just before avengers but I do not think so as he is tired from the whole debacle in Harlem). A Funny Thing... (as it is on the way to thor) Thor
2012 The Avengers Item 47 The Dark World (Disney plus has changed it to before/during Iron Man 3, not possible if the events is christmas 2012-2013 for IM3 and 2013 for Dark world, but anyway the list should state the same as disney plus unless you want utter confusion, if Dis+ is "correct" DW would be possibly autumn 2012, otherwise, like I always watched it Dark World shouldn't be before IM3 on Dis+)
2012-13 Iron Man 3 All Hail the King
2014 The Winter Soldier Guardians of the Galaxy Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
2015 Age of Ultron Ant-Man
2016 Civil War Black Panther Homecoming Doctor Strange (into 2017) 2017 Ragnarok (into 2018, infinity war picks up straight into the credits scene) 2018 Ant-Man and the Wasp (the same time as ragnarok/infinity war) Infinity War
2018–2023 BLIP
2023 Endgame WandaVision (3 weeks after BLIP)
2024 The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (6 months after BLIP) Far From Home (8 months after BLIP)
Anyway, I think it is the consultant before a funny thing happened, thor and avengers, not the consultant after thor -> consultant -> avengers! I guess it really doesn't matter, but since disneyplus now seems to be canon then it is only wierd if you don't list like Dis+. The Dark World vs Iron Man 3 placement is well confusing but well either or should switch it, wikipedia or disney lol.
Also well that wikipedia is not open source and locked by the overlords now just sucks, the world dictators that all these movies are fighting are taking over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.202.18 ( talk) 22:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Now that the multiverse has started with the introduction of Evan Peters' Quicksilver in WandaVision, I think we need to have a plan in place on how we're going to handle characters from other universes. For example, once it's confirmed in WandaVision that this is Peter from X-Men films and not MCU's Pietro, do we still call it a "recast" or reprising their role from another universe? Likewise, what happens when they introduce different versions of other MCU characters which may or may not be played by the same actor? How do we handle that in the list of recurring characters?
I think we will probably need to add a column to the recurring characters table to show other universes the character appears in. Or we could add another table for characters reprising their roles from other universes.
Obviously, we're not going to make any changes right now, until it's actually confirmed, but we might as well be ready because it's coming and it will get even messier with Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and the next Spider-Man. — Starforce13 18:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
The conversation was before they confirmed it. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thankfully this issue was resolved by the series itself. I'm glad that the FoX-Men will not be convoluting the MCU.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Douglas Petrie also was showrunner of The Defenders, so add him and correct Douglas Petrie's name in the list please. İh2055 ( talk) 19:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Upd: Everything's correct İh2055 ( talk) 20:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
But even though, fix Douglas' name, in titles his name is shown as Douglas not Doug İh2055 ( talk) 11:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I have brought this up before, but was curious as to why the Peter's To-Do List short is nowhere on the article. Previously it was discussed that it doesn't belong in the "Marvel One-shots"... however, despite this perhaps there should be a short films sub-section instead(?). Within this section we can have "One shots" AND other MCU short films. As this was released as an official short film on the home media releases, it needs to be on the article. Cheers m8s!-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add Captain America 4 to the Future feature films section. 119.18.1.8 ( talk) 08:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Anyone else feel like this table has gotten a bit ridiculous, especially now that crossovers between film and TV are going to be very common moving forward and those will be covered at each of the Phase Articles as well? - adamstom97 ( talk) 07:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
On another bit regarding the cast table, I was wondering if we should move the actors that are in the films and What If from the "Outside media" tab to "Television series" given now that the series may as well just be listed together with the rest of the series, especially since it is in Phase Four and the series' cast are listed normally on that article. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 18:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't think we should use "media type" as the defining criteria for who shows up in the table. I think the goal should be to provide the most relevant information to the readers that will help them understand the article (and MCU). So, to me it feels wrong to list barely notable characters here just because they happen to show up in different types of media - but leave out key players like Tony Stark and Steve Rogers. It just feels as if we're servicing trivia, not providing useful information. My proposal is to change this to someone who has appeared in billing blocks for multiple Marvel Studios franchises (films or Disney+ series). Notability and relevance are significant pillars of Wikipedia; and I just think people like Tony Stark are more notable recurring players in MCU, than say, Felix Blake. — Starforce13 19:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
too radicalis a bit over the top, especially in this case where the table is just getting messy and the only solutions to that so far would render it almost meaningless. I'm just trying to suggest a better alternative because I agree it doesn't make much sense to be so restrictive that barely anyone is included, but at the same time the current format is just not working. We already have big tables that show crossovers between films, crossovers between TV shows, and crossovers between films and TV shows, so the whole point of this section is to show recurring cast members over the franchise as a whole and at the moment I don't think we are doing a very good job of showing that. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I've had another think about this and this is what I know for sure:
This all reaffirms for me that we need to rethink what the point of this section even is and whether it needs to exist, or if it does then whether it needs to have a table. We already have full tables for all the films, series, and One-Shots, plus tables for each phase as well as one for all four phases. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Facu. We should essentially keep the same formatting for the table now, just removing/adding people based on new criteria. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 23:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and updated the cast criteria as discussed here. In the future, to keep the table small, we'll just need to increase the number of films/series and/or number of franchises to qualify.— Starforce13 22:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The current page has Kevin Feige being credited as the "creator" of the MCU. That information is false. Altough he did have contributions, the idea for the MCU came from David Maisel, and that's even said by Marvel itself. From its press release: "Mr. Maisel joined Marvel in December 2003. He was responsible for the conception and execution of the company's new film production initiative, including the establishment of the $525 million non-recourse loan facility to finance that strategy." [1]
Also, the current page includes the information that Avi Arad left Marvel because of differences with the MCU and didn't have confidence in it. That information is also false. According to Arad himself: "Our financing would have never happened without me reaching out to Brad Grey to make a distribution deal that will give you a corporate guarantee. Other people in Marvel worked for many months with Universal and could not reach a deal. I got tired of waiting and went to Brad. The deal was done in days, successful for both companies. The big presentation to financial institutions and insurance companies took place on the Paramount lot. I was the presenter and it worked. Does this sound to you like someone who disagreed with the strategy to make our own movies? [...] We had a list of titles, but the slate didn’t have Iron Man or Hulk, and I had a very tough time getting Iron Man back from New Line, but we got it back. I always loved Iron Man. I left because I wanted to leave. It was nothing other than it was time to go. The company was growing and I didn’t like committees and I was 60 and was doing well as it was. I took a walk and thought, ‘I’m too old for this.’" [2]
The page also says that Kevin Feige was named studio chief in 2007. Another false information. He became president of production in 2007, but was only named president in 2008. [3]
And Marvel Studios wasn't created because of the Spider-Man films, as it was created *before* they were even developed. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 15:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
References
(Maisel) was responsible for the conception and execution of the company's new film production initiative, including the establishment of the $525 million non-recourse loan facility to finance that strategy." "The company's new film production initiative" i.e. Marvel Studios, not the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The article does not even mention any aspect of a shared universe. You, however, changed "
Feige, a self-described "fanboy", envisioned creating a shared universe, just as creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had done with their comic books in the early 1960s." which is backed by the cited Boston.com article to "
David Maisel, president and COO of Marvel Studios, envisioned creating a shared universe, just as creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had done with their comic books in the early 1960s". This is WP:SYNTHESIS at best and outright WP:OR at worst.
References
These sources claiming Kevin Feige envisioned the MCU are just following the common assumption that he did. No one did what THR did, getting behind the stage of Marvel Studios.This is WP:OR / POV pushing. How do you know what work into their reporting? Also per WP:DUE: "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." This does not mean you erase all other viewpoints in favor of your chosen viewpoint as you have done in your recent edits. Keep in mind, "Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship as if they were of equal validity." I would definitely call this a "minority view or extraordinary claim".-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
my edit just mentions that he wasn't the one to first have the idea of the MCUwhich is removing the veiwpoint from other sources. Also you have not addressed the WP:SYN concerns raised above. You cannot simply take cited information from an article about Fiege and apply it to Maisel. What should you have done is present an opposing view, not erase reliably sourced information.
You are saying that because most websites came to the wrong assumptionThis is still a POV response, please try to remain neutral.
This can't be considered a "minority view or extraordinary claim", as it was published by a very big and reliable entertainment website, if it weren't then this would be a commonly accepted veiwpoint found in other reliable sources.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
you keep dismissing verifiable information as assumptionsHow can you say it is verifiable information? Was it you that wrote that article? How do you know they did a research and didn't go along with saying that Kevin Feige was the creator of the MCU because he is the face of Marvel Studios? If you can say I can't go and proclaim they went along with a assumption because I don't know what work went into their reporting, you can't say they verify their information because you also don't know.
it is not our job to proclaim what is or what isn’t truthAnd yet, if you're against my edit claiming that David Maisel was the creator of the MCU, then you're saying it's a lie, because you're in favor of claiming that Kevin Feige is the creator.
We simply present reliably source informationAnd I'm presenting to you reliably source information. I'm giving you information from THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER. One of the biggest entertainment websites in the planet. But you say they might have an "agenda". And you gave me an article from Boston.com. Come on, man. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 18:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Who are these people "with firsthand knowledge of Maisel's tenure"?Ask the writer of the piece.
If there are such people with "firsthand knowledge of Maisel's tenure", surely the Hollywood Reporter is not the only source that they talked to.This would only support what I'm saying that these websites didn't talked with anyone about Kevin Feige creating the MCU, because, if they did, these people might have said "Hey, it wasn't all Feige". -- Newtlamender ( talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
We deal in verifiable information here.Man, you're treating being a editor in Wikipedia like you're a police officer working on a case. Chill. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 20:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Newtlamender: "...because most websites came to the wrong assumption...
". That is a very bold claim, can you prove that? If you haven't already, you need to give
WP:RS and
WP:V a read. Also, see
WP:Verifiability, not truth. (jmho) -
wolf 19:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Most sources, both before and after the Hollywood Reporter piece, focus on Maisel's proposal for Marvel to produce films themselves instead of selling the licenses, producing many films based on the properties, and securing financing for Iron Man. ( Polygon, Superhero Hype, Vanity Fair, ScreenCrush Many other reliable sites have picked up or referenced THR's story though ( MovieWeb, Wall Street Journal, Screen Rant, Yahoo!). To respond to a particular thing Rcarter555 said: it doesn't matter if the sources THR cites are anonymous. THR is a source of the highest reputation, so any anonymous source they cite is regarded as reliable if they consider it reliable enough to include it in their article.
So, based on this, we can definitely mention Maisel's idea to produce films instead of selling licenses, and produce several films about different properties. We can also mention that THR reported he came up with the shared universe concept, and specifically use the word reported
in order not to give it the quality of truth, as it conflicts somewhat with most other sources that don't take the info directly from this interview and Feige and Marvel declined to comment on the matter. We can literally put In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter in 2016, Maisel said "so and so"
. That way, we include the info while given it the weight it merits, without presenting it as the "true" version of the events. —
El Millo (
talk) 03:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Favre1fan93, Adamstom.97, Facu-el Millo, TriiipleThreat, Alex 21, BD2412, Cardei012597, and Starforce13: So, this article was recently tagged as potentially being very long and in order of some clean-up to aid readers in navigation through all of the content. There are some paragraphs that can clearly be merged together for being too short, while others seem to be quite long. Some parts may be over-specific towards the nature of this article's focus on the franchise as a whole by focusing on the specifics of certain properties that can and are covered in specific articles (i.e. the Spidey stuff, Netflix, Hulu, ABC, Damage Control, New Warriors, etc.) I think we need to thoroughly re-evaluate the bulk of information we are giving and how to order them, and tidy things up. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 18:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Another artical focused on Development of the MCU can be nice solution. Can't we just do the same as it has been done with Mark Ruffalo's Filmography Section. Marvelouseditor6651 ( talk) 20:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Should The Daily Bugle YouTube videos be added to the Digital Series section? StarWarsFan2247 ( talk) 13:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Wait that doesn’t really example that though. The Daily Bugle is basically the same thing as the Agents Of Shield thing (I forgot the name lol). Also the Daily Bugle thing has it’s own site and social media including twitter, Instagram, and the YouTube channel so it might make sense to talk about the site mainly. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Bump. It makes a ton of sense to add in the Daily Bugle to the page. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 01:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Just a heads up that I feel this draft is almost ready for mainspace with the exception of a long plot summary. Also keeping an eye out for potential edit war is noted as recommended. Jhenderson 777 21:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessmment will follow the same sections of the Article. -- Whiteguru ( talk) 08:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Instructions: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment
The reviewed version of this page (10 April 2014) which achieved Good Article status only had 8 sections. This included, inter-alia,
That page has since expanded to 16 sections and now includes 14 tables (many transcluded from other pages) and there are now 583 references. At this point in time the page no longer resembles anything that achieved Good Article status in the past. Nearly 1 million page views per month, approx 30,000 page views daily.
The objective of this Good Article reassessment is - among other matters -
Development (and its length)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add "Untitled Captain America 4" Mrmatt24 ( talk) 08:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Can't add until officialy announced. Marvelouseditor6651 ( talk) 01:37, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
The various exhibits listed in
Marvel Cinematic Universe#Outside media aren't following the MoS, but I'm not sure which category they fall under.
MOS:MAJORWORK#Major works says to italic Named exhibitions (artistic, historical, scientific, educational, cultural, literary, etc. – generally hosted by, or part of, an existing institution such as a museum or gallery), but not large-scale exhibition events or individual exhibits
, and
MOS:MINORWORK#Quotation marks says to add quotes to Exhibits (specific) within a larger exhibition
.
The exhibits in the section are: Iron Man Tech Presented by Stark Industries, Thor: Treasures of Asgard, Captain America: The Living Legend and Symbol of Courage, Avengers S.T.A.T.I.O.N. and Marvel: Creating the Cinematic Universe. -- Gonnym ( talk) 07:50, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
named exhibition... hosted by... an existing institution(GOMA). The Iron Man, Thor, and Cap exhibits at Disneyland would be minor I think, since they were part of the Innoventions attraction. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 15:14, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
What's the point of them? They appear randomly chosen, and don't correspond to anything else in the article... Argento Surfer ( talk) 20:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
As the title says, Rhodey/ War Machine played by Terrence Howard (Iron Man) and Don Cheadle (rest of the films) is missing. δα ωλα ( talk) 09:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The TV series from old Marvel studios are not referenced in the MCU, are they a part of it? Halbared ( talk) 21:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Why isn't Robert Downey, Jr. in the list of recurring characters? Chris Evans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6011:AE05:808:89FF:C0ED:93D8:43EF ( talk) 02:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Fantastic Four to unnanounced phase 139.180.29.241 ( talk) 01:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Shouldn't this go under the section titled "Live-action television specials", since it's not actually a series but a TV special? Rafaelchan118 ( talk) 17:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Blade and Fantastic Four to upcoming movies. While Fantastic Four's release is TBA, Blade was reported as releasing before Captain Marvel 2 ( https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/marvel-studios-confirms-blade-release-captain-marvel-2/). RojManVB ( talk) 00:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Peter's To Do List is Marvel's sixth One-Shot. Add this to One-Shot list. Besides upcoming The Guardians Of The Galaxy Holiday Special is a SPECIAL not a TV show and I Am Groot isn't One-Shot, it's an animated short TV series. Create new categories for them please. İh2055 ( talk) 17:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, i have one more offer. What If...? is an animated show then why it's shown in the list of TV series, it's an animated TV show, create special category for it and show that it's the part of Phase 4. İh2055 ( talk) 08:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Peter's To Do List should at least be listed separately in short film like I Am Groot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.84.115.136 ( talk) 08:45, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I think that we should remove the 2022 release date por the new Ant-Man film, there isn't a direct source and the Marvel's 2022 slate is so crowded, it's impossible that they would have more films. It will be 2023 I think, but we should write just TBA. 31.131.176.228 ( talk) 16:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Marvel Studios: Legends should be added in Disney+ Series.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.84.115.136 ( talk) 10:23, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Add Peter's To Do List and Marvel Studios: Legends to Other Media İh2055 ( talk) 20:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
The Daily Bugle YouTube channel found at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGfq7EcxdrDN9hSo-iOaSxg should be added under digital series. It's relatively similar to the WHIH Newsfront youtube channel, and J.K. Simmons is already credited under recurring characters in the section on that, so I see no reason this should be excluded 2603:6010:AF01:AC00:E919:5A49:288F:A33A ( talk) 15:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
With WandaVision premiering in just over a week, I have gone ahead and published Vision (Marvel Cinematic Universe). It still needs some content on the reception of the character/performance, if anyone has a finger on sources for that purpose. BD2412 T 20:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Didn't Kevin Feige confirm Deadpool 3 in the MCU? Should that be put in the future movie section? TonyStank123456789 ( talk) 04:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
adding Deadpool 3 in development on future Lukemegner ( talk) 09:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
MCU films are famously categorised into phases, typically ended by an Avengers movie, where they are grouped by relative chronoligical appearance and plot importance shouldn't the four (and future) phases be described in a subsection? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VN28 ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
These 2 were confirmed but they are not here at Future section in Feature films in a different phase (unannounced phase). Why are they excluded? Kohcohf ( talk) 16:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Why Marvel's The Avengers, not The Avengers? If you including title to one of them then why you don't add it to all of them? İh2055 ( talk) 09:50, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Also, to expand upon it, it's also likely because there are multiple unrelated/non-Marvel films called the Avengers as well, and so they may not want to, at a glance, have someone confusing between those the Avengers and the Marvel the Avengers. They don't have that confusion with Daredevil or Punisher because they are not only Marvel, but the MCU has them as TV shows while when they weren't MCU produced they were only films. I do agree that the "Marvel's" part of it isn't actually/shouldn't be part of the title (as it's like saying "DC's Superman" or "Universal's Godzilla", etc. where it's not actually part of the title, just a notation, for lack of a better term, to inform that this is the Studio making this movie, like which "the Avengers" is it, it's specifically the Marvel one, if that makes any sense), but I do understand why they have it the way they do. 45.51.166.54 ( talk) 17:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
When searching for the Marvel Cinematic Universe Wikipedia page, the picture associated with the home page is Joss Wheaton, if possible please change it to Kevin Feige.
Joss is a controversial figure and in my mind does not deserve to be the face of the Marvel Cinematic Universe on Wikipedia. He has only directed 2 of the 20+ movies, while Kevin Feige has been the driving force of the entire franchise. 2601:681:800:3580:D029:3084:847D:692B ( talk) 00:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
During his opening statement on the investor's day, Feige said that the MCU consisted of 23 films, which would now be expanded into the TV shows as well. It clearly means that Marvel TV is officially non-canon. Could someone explain why they are still on this page? Anubhab030119 ( talk) 20:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay thanks for the answer guys. Hope to soon find some clarification either way from Marvel Studios. Anubhab030119 ( talk) 01:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
AS OF NOW, Marvel TV is still canon, Anubhab030119, so FOR NOW you are not correct (though for some shows you very well might be). Feige has previously acknowledged that the shows are canon to the MCU, and what he now means is that they are creating shows that (one) are made by Marvel Studios and (two) interconnect with the shows and movies. The Marvel Television shows connected with the films, but the films never connected with them. In that same mindset, the shows have been marketed as being connected to the MCU previously. However, we do not know Marvel Studios plans and they could use characters for other purposes in the MCU. Here's the deal with continuity in the MCU and how we know if shows are or are not canon. Right now, every show thought to be canon is canon. Many rumors point to Charlie Cox aka Matt Murdock being in the upcoming Spider-Man film this December, and if this is true along with other rumors that other Marvel Netflix characters will be returning to the MCU starting in this film, then all these films can be considered canon. If this ends up being the case for ALL of the Netflix shows, then Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, The Defenders and The Punisher all remain canon. Cloak & Dagger has a few small but important connections with the Netflix shows, so if any of the Netflix shows were to be considered canon, they would take Cloak & Dagger, and Runaways which connects to Cloak & Dagger, with it. If Runaways was considered non-canon but Cloak & Dagger was not, than Runaways and the Netflix shows would remain canon, but Runaways wouldn't. If Cloak & Dagger was proved non-canon but Runaways wasn't, then Cloak & Dagger AND Runaways would both be considered non-canon, however the Netflix shows can exist without Cloak & Dagger and Runaways, but Cloak & Dagger and Runaways not without the Netflix shows. See what I'm getting at here? Alright. As you can see, the Netflix and MCU young adult shows are very closely connected and depend on each other very much, but what about the other shows? If Helstrom or any of it's characters are used in a way that contradicts the show's events in the MCU, then the show will be considered non-canon. If Inhumans (which I believe will be the one show that will end up being non-canon by the end of this year) or any of its characters (the Inhuman Royal Family) are used in a contradicting way in the MCU going forward, then they will be considered non-canon.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Agent Carter remain in a pretty safe zone for now. Agent Carter is the one show that has little risk of becoming non-canon as it was already confirmed continuity in the 2019 film Avengers: Endgame with the Edwin Jarvis cameo. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. has a bit more risk. If Hive, Gravitron, or the Shrike were used in a contradicting way in the MCU films, then the show can be considered non-canon. Same goes with Quake. However, if rumors about Quake in future MCU content are true, then we might have confirmation that the show is canon to the MCU.
I think that the Inhuman Royal Family will be rebooted; likely in the show Ms. Marvel which comes out this fall; which would make Inhumans not canon. We could very well see Netflix/young-adult confirmation or decanonization by the end of 2021 so that debate should be settled, and possibly Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. by the end of 2022, with Helstrom a possibility in the next few years (it looks like Agent Carter will always remain safe), and by 2023 this debate can be ended. But for now, all the shows ARE canon, but they are all subject to change anytime soon. I hope this answers all your questions about this Anubhab030119. I know it's alot and I'm sorry, but it's the best way to get a good explanation out. IronMan287 ( talk) 04:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)IronMan287 IronMan287 ( talk) 04:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
IronMan287 that's an very impressive answer brother. Thanks a lot for taking so much time to provide such a detailed explanation. I too hope that this debate ends sooner rather than later. Cheers. Anubhab030119 ( talk) 08:18, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Agreed Anubhab. Great stuff. Personally I do think they are all canon in this timeline (Maybe not Inhumans like IronMan mentioned). The only one that would actually be hard to be cano is Agents Of Shield. Long story but basically the Snap doesn’t happen for some reason in AOS but Infinity War is referenced before. This makes it clear it’s in a different timeline but does it mean they are non-canon? Nah. What it means in my opinion is that it’s part of the Multiverse and is a branch of the timeline blah blah lol. It’s best to say they are all canon. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I have a few edits to the timeline section I think I should make. I've been researching the MCU for a while with a good number of fans who have interests similar to mine, and we have done some deep digging into the timeline of the MCU. You can check out our work on this page: https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline and the linked decade or year pages found on that page, in which we have detailed explanations throughout the reference sections.
I would not like to change anything it says, but instead add on our discovered and sensible timeline of the MCU films; providing evidence as needed. This does include lots of similarities with the released timeline however, though the beginning is the only thing that really differs/ I'll include the edits that I want to make that are different than what Marvel Studios has already established using my already discovered evidence; also the fact that Marvel films often take place around their release dates, with exception of flashback films, Iron Man-Thor, Iron Man 3, GOTG Vol. 2, Black Panther and all films Avengers: Endgame and beyond:
- Captain America: The First Avenger (1943-1945)
- Captain Marvel (1995)
- Iron Man (May-November 2009)
- Iron Man 2 (May 2010)
- The Incredible Hulk (May-Early June, 2010)
- Thor (Late May-Early June, 2010) - note: Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk and Thor's big battles take place mostly during the same week as evidence in the comic book tie-in Fury's Big Week
- The Avengers (May 2012)
- Iron Man 3 (December 2012, leads into first few days of 2013)
- Thor: The Dark World (November 2013, but the prologue takes place right after The Avengers in 2012)
- Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Early 2014; likely January)
- Guardians of the Galaxy (August 2014)
- Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (October 2014)
- Avengers: Age of Ultron (April 2015)
- Ant-Man (July 2015)
- Doctor Strange (takes place from February 2016-February 2017)
- Captain America: Civil War (May 2016)
- Black Panther (a few weeks after Civil War, likely June 2016)
- Spider-Man: Homecoming (a couple months after Civil War, start of school year; September-October 2016)
- Thor: Ragnarok (November 2017)
- Ant-Man and the Wasp (Majority of film takes place in early May 2018)
- Avengers: Infinity War (Late May 2018)
- Avengers: Endgame (Prologue takes place a couple weeks after Infinity War in late June 2018)
- Avengers: Endgame time jump (October 2023)
- WandaVision (Three weeks after snap, which mid-October, putting it around early to mid November 2023)
- Spider-Man: Far From Home (Takes place in June 2024, post-credits scene at the start of July 2024)
I really hope this explanation can help people really figure out the MCU timeline. If you need me to provide what I would say in the timeline section and my explanations for certain parts of the timeline, I will gladly do so! IronMan287 ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)IronMan287 IronMan287 ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Timeline makes more sense for it’s article in my opinion. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes, me, the same person wrote these two edits and the origininal post lol
Obviously a lot of things in the movies happen simultaneously and the problem people have with chronology is that you can't really watch them at the same time, the same goes for scenes in a movie, you want a chronology but in any movie, a lot of scenes happen at the same time but you get stuck in your mind that it is happening linear. Anyway it goes without saying that these movies is always best watched in production order then you have to "fill in the blanks" as you go. With that said there is now just confusion on the mcu wikipage after Disneyplus mashes "their order" up for the "best timeline experience".
Since disneyplus is sticking to a new timeline order you should rearrange it in the list on the mcu page:
1943–1945 The First Avenger (2010-2012 present scenes, I always took it to be just before Avengers, but the post credit scene of Iron Man, "you think you are the only hero", well it can be anywhere really before or after Iron Man that Steve wakes up from iced. 1946 Agent Carter
1989-1995 Captain Marvel
2010 Iron Man 2011 Iron Man 2 The Incredible Hulk The Consultant (THIS FITS BEST AFTER HULK as it ties with the post credits scene of Hulk, but I guess you could say Tony Stark visits Gen. Ross just before avengers but I do not think so as he is tired from the whole debacle in Harlem). A Funny Thing... (as it is on the way to thor) Thor
2012 The Avengers Item 47 The Dark World (Disney plus has changed it to before/during Iron Man 3, not possible if the events is christmas 2012-2013 for IM3 and 2013 for Dark world, but anyway the list should state the same as disney plus unless you want utter confusion, if Dis+ is "correct" DW would be possibly autumn 2012, otherwise, like I always watched it Dark World shouldn't be before IM3 on Dis+)
2012-13 Iron Man 3 All Hail the King
2014 The Winter Soldier Guardians of the Galaxy Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
2015 Age of Ultron Ant-Man
2016 Civil War Black Panther Homecoming Doctor Strange (into 2017) 2017 Ragnarok (into 2018, infinity war picks up straight into the credits scene) 2018 Ant-Man and the Wasp (the same time as ragnarok/infinity war) Infinity War
2018–2023 BLIP
2023 Endgame WandaVision (3 weeks after BLIP)
2024 The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (6 months after BLIP) Far From Home (8 months after BLIP)
Anyway, I think it is the consultant before a funny thing happened, thor and avengers, not the consultant after thor -> consultant -> avengers! I guess it really doesn't matter, but since disneyplus now seems to be canon then it is only wierd if you don't list like Dis+. The Dark World vs Iron Man 3 placement is well confusing but well either or should switch it, wikipedia or disney lol.
Also well that wikipedia is not open source and locked by the overlords now just sucks, the world dictators that all these movies are fighting are taking over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.202.18 ( talk) 22:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Now that the multiverse has started with the introduction of Evan Peters' Quicksilver in WandaVision, I think we need to have a plan in place on how we're going to handle characters from other universes. For example, once it's confirmed in WandaVision that this is Peter from X-Men films and not MCU's Pietro, do we still call it a "recast" or reprising their role from another universe? Likewise, what happens when they introduce different versions of other MCU characters which may or may not be played by the same actor? How do we handle that in the list of recurring characters?
I think we will probably need to add a column to the recurring characters table to show other universes the character appears in. Or we could add another table for characters reprising their roles from other universes.
Obviously, we're not going to make any changes right now, until it's actually confirmed, but we might as well be ready because it's coming and it will get even messier with Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and the next Spider-Man. — Starforce13 18:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
The conversation was before they confirmed it. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thankfully this issue was resolved by the series itself. I'm glad that the FoX-Men will not be convoluting the MCU.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Douglas Petrie also was showrunner of The Defenders, so add him and correct Douglas Petrie's name in the list please. İh2055 ( talk) 19:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Upd: Everything's correct İh2055 ( talk) 20:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
But even though, fix Douglas' name, in titles his name is shown as Douglas not Doug İh2055 ( talk) 11:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I have brought this up before, but was curious as to why the Peter's To-Do List short is nowhere on the article. Previously it was discussed that it doesn't belong in the "Marvel One-shots"... however, despite this perhaps there should be a short films sub-section instead(?). Within this section we can have "One shots" AND other MCU short films. As this was released as an official short film on the home media releases, it needs to be on the article. Cheers m8s!-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add Captain America 4 to the Future feature films section. 119.18.1.8 ( talk) 08:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Anyone else feel like this table has gotten a bit ridiculous, especially now that crossovers between film and TV are going to be very common moving forward and those will be covered at each of the Phase Articles as well? - adamstom97 ( talk) 07:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
On another bit regarding the cast table, I was wondering if we should move the actors that are in the films and What If from the "Outside media" tab to "Television series" given now that the series may as well just be listed together with the rest of the series, especially since it is in Phase Four and the series' cast are listed normally on that article. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 18:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't think we should use "media type" as the defining criteria for who shows up in the table. I think the goal should be to provide the most relevant information to the readers that will help them understand the article (and MCU). So, to me it feels wrong to list barely notable characters here just because they happen to show up in different types of media - but leave out key players like Tony Stark and Steve Rogers. It just feels as if we're servicing trivia, not providing useful information. My proposal is to change this to someone who has appeared in billing blocks for multiple Marvel Studios franchises (films or Disney+ series). Notability and relevance are significant pillars of Wikipedia; and I just think people like Tony Stark are more notable recurring players in MCU, than say, Felix Blake. — Starforce13 19:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
too radicalis a bit over the top, especially in this case where the table is just getting messy and the only solutions to that so far would render it almost meaningless. I'm just trying to suggest a better alternative because I agree it doesn't make much sense to be so restrictive that barely anyone is included, but at the same time the current format is just not working. We already have big tables that show crossovers between films, crossovers between TV shows, and crossovers between films and TV shows, so the whole point of this section is to show recurring cast members over the franchise as a whole and at the moment I don't think we are doing a very good job of showing that. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I've had another think about this and this is what I know for sure:
This all reaffirms for me that we need to rethink what the point of this section even is and whether it needs to exist, or if it does then whether it needs to have a table. We already have full tables for all the films, series, and One-Shots, plus tables for each phase as well as one for all four phases. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Facu. We should essentially keep the same formatting for the table now, just removing/adding people based on new criteria. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 23:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and updated the cast criteria as discussed here. In the future, to keep the table small, we'll just need to increase the number of films/series and/or number of franchises to qualify.— Starforce13 22:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The current page has Kevin Feige being credited as the "creator" of the MCU. That information is false. Altough he did have contributions, the idea for the MCU came from David Maisel, and that's even said by Marvel itself. From its press release: "Mr. Maisel joined Marvel in December 2003. He was responsible for the conception and execution of the company's new film production initiative, including the establishment of the $525 million non-recourse loan facility to finance that strategy." [1]
Also, the current page includes the information that Avi Arad left Marvel because of differences with the MCU and didn't have confidence in it. That information is also false. According to Arad himself: "Our financing would have never happened without me reaching out to Brad Grey to make a distribution deal that will give you a corporate guarantee. Other people in Marvel worked for many months with Universal and could not reach a deal. I got tired of waiting and went to Brad. The deal was done in days, successful for both companies. The big presentation to financial institutions and insurance companies took place on the Paramount lot. I was the presenter and it worked. Does this sound to you like someone who disagreed with the strategy to make our own movies? [...] We had a list of titles, but the slate didn’t have Iron Man or Hulk, and I had a very tough time getting Iron Man back from New Line, but we got it back. I always loved Iron Man. I left because I wanted to leave. It was nothing other than it was time to go. The company was growing and I didn’t like committees and I was 60 and was doing well as it was. I took a walk and thought, ‘I’m too old for this.’" [2]
The page also says that Kevin Feige was named studio chief in 2007. Another false information. He became president of production in 2007, but was only named president in 2008. [3]
And Marvel Studios wasn't created because of the Spider-Man films, as it was created *before* they were even developed. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 15:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
References
(Maisel) was responsible for the conception and execution of the company's new film production initiative, including the establishment of the $525 million non-recourse loan facility to finance that strategy." "The company's new film production initiative" i.e. Marvel Studios, not the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The article does not even mention any aspect of a shared universe. You, however, changed "
Feige, a self-described "fanboy", envisioned creating a shared universe, just as creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had done with their comic books in the early 1960s." which is backed by the cited Boston.com article to "
David Maisel, president and COO of Marvel Studios, envisioned creating a shared universe, just as creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby had done with their comic books in the early 1960s". This is WP:SYNTHESIS at best and outright WP:OR at worst.
References
These sources claiming Kevin Feige envisioned the MCU are just following the common assumption that he did. No one did what THR did, getting behind the stage of Marvel Studios.This is WP:OR / POV pushing. How do you know what work into their reporting? Also per WP:DUE: "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." This does not mean you erase all other viewpoints in favor of your chosen viewpoint as you have done in your recent edits. Keep in mind, "Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship as if they were of equal validity." I would definitely call this a "minority view or extraordinary claim".-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
my edit just mentions that he wasn't the one to first have the idea of the MCUwhich is removing the veiwpoint from other sources. Also you have not addressed the WP:SYN concerns raised above. You cannot simply take cited information from an article about Fiege and apply it to Maisel. What should you have done is present an opposing view, not erase reliably sourced information.
You are saying that because most websites came to the wrong assumptionThis is still a POV response, please try to remain neutral.
This can't be considered a "minority view or extraordinary claim", as it was published by a very big and reliable entertainment website, if it weren't then this would be a commonly accepted veiwpoint found in other reliable sources.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
you keep dismissing verifiable information as assumptionsHow can you say it is verifiable information? Was it you that wrote that article? How do you know they did a research and didn't go along with saying that Kevin Feige was the creator of the MCU because he is the face of Marvel Studios? If you can say I can't go and proclaim they went along with a assumption because I don't know what work went into their reporting, you can't say they verify their information because you also don't know.
it is not our job to proclaim what is or what isn’t truthAnd yet, if you're against my edit claiming that David Maisel was the creator of the MCU, then you're saying it's a lie, because you're in favor of claiming that Kevin Feige is the creator.
We simply present reliably source informationAnd I'm presenting to you reliably source information. I'm giving you information from THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER. One of the biggest entertainment websites in the planet. But you say they might have an "agenda". And you gave me an article from Boston.com. Come on, man. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 18:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Who are these people "with firsthand knowledge of Maisel's tenure"?Ask the writer of the piece.
If there are such people with "firsthand knowledge of Maisel's tenure", surely the Hollywood Reporter is not the only source that they talked to.This would only support what I'm saying that these websites didn't talked with anyone about Kevin Feige creating the MCU, because, if they did, these people might have said "Hey, it wasn't all Feige". -- Newtlamender ( talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
We deal in verifiable information here.Man, you're treating being a editor in Wikipedia like you're a police officer working on a case. Chill. -- Newtlamender ( talk) 20:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Newtlamender: "...because most websites came to the wrong assumption...
". That is a very bold claim, can you prove that? If you haven't already, you need to give
WP:RS and
WP:V a read. Also, see
WP:Verifiability, not truth. (jmho) -
wolf 19:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Most sources, both before and after the Hollywood Reporter piece, focus on Maisel's proposal for Marvel to produce films themselves instead of selling the licenses, producing many films based on the properties, and securing financing for Iron Man. ( Polygon, Superhero Hype, Vanity Fair, ScreenCrush Many other reliable sites have picked up or referenced THR's story though ( MovieWeb, Wall Street Journal, Screen Rant, Yahoo!). To respond to a particular thing Rcarter555 said: it doesn't matter if the sources THR cites are anonymous. THR is a source of the highest reputation, so any anonymous source they cite is regarded as reliable if they consider it reliable enough to include it in their article.
So, based on this, we can definitely mention Maisel's idea to produce films instead of selling licenses, and produce several films about different properties. We can also mention that THR reported he came up with the shared universe concept, and specifically use the word reported
in order not to give it the quality of truth, as it conflicts somewhat with most other sources that don't take the info directly from this interview and Feige and Marvel declined to comment on the matter. We can literally put In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter in 2016, Maisel said "so and so"
. That way, we include the info while given it the weight it merits, without presenting it as the "true" version of the events. —
El Millo (
talk) 03:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Favre1fan93, Adamstom.97, Facu-el Millo, TriiipleThreat, Alex 21, BD2412, Cardei012597, and Starforce13: So, this article was recently tagged as potentially being very long and in order of some clean-up to aid readers in navigation through all of the content. There are some paragraphs that can clearly be merged together for being too short, while others seem to be quite long. Some parts may be over-specific towards the nature of this article's focus on the franchise as a whole by focusing on the specifics of certain properties that can and are covered in specific articles (i.e. the Spidey stuff, Netflix, Hulu, ABC, Damage Control, New Warriors, etc.) I think we need to thoroughly re-evaluate the bulk of information we are giving and how to order them, and tidy things up. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 18:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Another artical focused on Development of the MCU can be nice solution. Can't we just do the same as it has been done with Mark Ruffalo's Filmography Section. Marvelouseditor6651 ( talk) 20:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Should The Daily Bugle YouTube videos be added to the Digital Series section? StarWarsFan2247 ( talk) 13:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Wait that doesn’t really example that though. The Daily Bugle is basically the same thing as the Agents Of Shield thing (I forgot the name lol). Also the Daily Bugle thing has it’s own site and social media including twitter, Instagram, and the YouTube channel so it might make sense to talk about the site mainly. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 05:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Bump. It makes a ton of sense to add in the Daily Bugle to the page. RobbyB3ll4s ( talk) 01:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Just a heads up that I feel this draft is almost ready for mainspace with the exception of a long plot summary. Also keeping an eye out for potential edit war is noted as recommended. Jhenderson 777 21:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessmment will follow the same sections of the Article. -- Whiteguru ( talk) 08:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Instructions: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment
The reviewed version of this page (10 April 2014) which achieved Good Article status only had 8 sections. This included, inter-alia,
That page has since expanded to 16 sections and now includes 14 tables (many transcluded from other pages) and there are now 583 references. At this point in time the page no longer resembles anything that achieved Good Article status in the past. Nearly 1 million page views per month, approx 30,000 page views daily.
The objective of this Good Article reassessment is - among other matters -
Development (and its length)
This
edit request to
Marvel Cinematic Universe has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add "Untitled Captain America 4" Mrmatt24 ( talk) 08:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Can't add until officialy announced. Marvelouseditor6651 ( talk) 01:37, 16 May 2021 (UTC)