![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I came across Art of the Title and found these interviews with the studios that did the title sequence for these films:
I checked a few articles that didn't have any information about the title sequence design, so these could be helpful in adding information to the above articles. Gonnym ( talk) 15:25, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
So, up until today I was pretty much content with how we’re handling the Multiverse stuff for Marvel. However, after I watched a video explaining what the tree at the end of Loki S2 could really mean I am not so sure anymore.
Some takeaways:
So what I’m suggesting/proposing:
Could this be all moot and be nothing more then me WP:SYNTHing? Possibly, but I’m trying to convey this in logic that the movies and shows themselves and the creators behind it have explained before, without trying to fill in gaps with stuff not explicitly said. Let me know what you think of this and if you have any alternate ideas to clean this up. MarioProtIV ( talk/ contribs) 22:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal to change the naming conventions of TV season articles from the current practice of XXX (season 1)
to XXX, season 1
or XXX season 1
. As such a change would affect a substantial number of articles, you are invited to participate in the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Move TV seasons from parenthetical disambiguation to comma disambiguation. Thank you.
InfiniteNexus (
talk)
04:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Shouldn't Kevin Feige have a higher MCU importance rating in WikiProjects? I noticed today he's marked as low importance. I know it isn't an exact 1:1, but Star Wars has George Lucas as a top importance rating, which I wouldn't be against putting Feige at the same rating within the MCU. -- Zoo Blazer 05:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Gonnym: Regarding your recent edits turning the line breaks into two separate links, is there a policy or guideline that says not to do this? I ask because I know this is also done on many other articles, including the several MCU films co-directed by the Russos and/or co-written by Markus and McFeely. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
It looks like Rotten Tomatoes no longer displays the X/10 ratings for TV episodes. If that's the case I'd assume most of the episode articles would have to remove the scores since it is no longer sourced. -- Zoo Blazer 04:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I am aware John Rocha is considered a subject-matter expert based on WP:SPS but may I ask how? The policy states that a reliable, independent source must publish them for them to be considered a subject-matter expert, but I don't recall a rumor from John Rocha specifically, not Jeff Sneider, being published by a reliable source. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that. In the Wonder Man article, his rumor about the series being canceled is reported on by ScreenGeek, a non-reliable source.
However, if it is actually the Hot Mic Podcast as a whole that is considered a self-published source and Rocha is basically grandfathered into being considered an SME, I strongly believe we should make an exception and stray from that as there is a significant disparity between Sneider's and Rocha's level of reliability, and he even admits this himself. Anytime he's about to share something he heard, he prefaces it by saying "Jeff's the credible one so takes this with a grain of salt," essentially admitting that his rumors are not credible, here's one example.
In that one example, he proceeds to claim that the Fantastic Four cast would be announced "by the end of next week", which of course has not happened. Ten days after his "Wonder Man is dead" claim, THR and Deadline said the series was still happening. On his latest stream, he said he'd seen reports that Ayo Edebiri might be pulling out of Thunderbolts. I've scoured Twitter to find such a report but I don't believe it exists. Three days later at the Golden Globes, Edebiri reiterated she's still in the film. (Besides, why is someone simply saying they saw a rumor even being mentioned on Wikipedia in the first place?) Later in that stream, he read out a fake Thunderbolts premise, thinking it was official, that actually traces back to one of those shady Marvel Updates accounts on Twitter, and the premise is clearly supposed to be a joke as it is almost a 1:1 match for the Suicide Squad plot.
I am aware that it is not up to Wikipedia editors to determine whether a source is credible or not, but I felt the need to share my thoughts and to see what others may think. What's happening here is we're basically considering a self-admittedly non-reliable source reliable and sometimes even reporting on things he says he saw online. As I said before, if Rocha is being considered an SME under the umbrella of the Hot Mic Podcast, I believe an exception should made in this case and his rumors should not be included on Wikipedia. What do you guys think? Aldwiki1 ( talk) 16:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I nominated Iron Man and/or Endgame to become vital articles if anyone has anything they would like to add to the discussion which can be found here. -- Zoo Blazer 19:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Are unused episode reference lists such as those at List of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. characters#Season 1 a valid usage? When a normal reference is unused it will throw an error "ref is not used in the content" and be placed in an error category. Using them this way bypasses this check. Additionally, we end up with a situation where have duplicate references (such as to "One of Us"). I think we should comment out the unused list so any future use is already ready, but when used, they should be added to the normal reference list. Gonnym ( talk) 13:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Yesterday, @
Gonnym went through a bunch of articles, files, and redirects related to Deadpool and Deadpool 2 and tagged them with |mcu=yes
. I was halfway through reverting them but stopped when they began re-reverting. You can see the subsequent discussion
here. We currently do not regard Deadpool and Deadpool 2 as part of the MCU on any of our articles, including
List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films, and neither does
Deadpool (film) nor
Deadpool 2.
I'm fairly certain we've discussed this before with multiversal films in general, but I guess this is trickier since Deadpool 3 is a direct sequel to the previous films. But even then, I don't think we can treat them as MCU because from a real-world perspective, they were still produced by a different studio and set in a different franchise. That Disney has decided to keep the same actor for Deadpool as they have done with several other characters (for fan-service/$$$ reasons) does not change this or make the previous two films canon. Gonnym, however, believes that Deadpool 3 connects to the MCU [so] it does mean that Deadpool 1 and 2 belong to the MCU
. They also argue that |mcu=yes
doesn't necessarily mean it's MCU, but I'll note that we don't tag any of the SSU films, or the X-Men films, or even other articles tangentially related to the MCU like
Walt Disney Studios (division) and
Marvel Comics. Thoughts?
InfiniteNexus ( talk) 18:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
|marvel=yes
and through
WP:FILM discussions that many of us are also on. Deadpool 3 was never an official title so one could argue that Deadpool & Wolverine is somewhat separate from the prior films, though it cannot be argued that it being in the MCU would make the prior films (let alone other X-Men films) worthy of the MCU tag. We don't (and shouldn't) do that for the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man films,
Elektra, the Venom films, or any appearance of Charles Xavier. Same with
X-Men '97. The comics articles don't and shouldn't use the MCU tags. Making an exception for the prior Deadpool films seems unnecessary and counterintuitive.
Trailblazer101 (
talk)
18:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree with InfiniteNexus, having a sequel in the MCU doesn't mean they're connected enough for the tag, should be a more explicit connection for the tag. Maguire's Spider-Man 1 and Garfield's The Amazing Spider-Man are more connected from their appearances in No Way Home but aren't and shouldn't be tagged. Indagate ( talk) 20:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I was getting to the content table and saw these adds after glancing at this discussion. I've removed the remaining Deadpool-related articles from being tagged. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello all! After some editing at Thor: Love and Thunder regarding the use of a hatnote for Marvel Studios: Assembled in its "Documentary special" section, there is now a whole discussion at Wikipedia talk:Hatnote#Hatnote overuse? regarding this and an alleged "overuse" of this, which would benefit from the perspectives of other contributors here, given we strive to keep our articles consistent. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 04:02, 1 April 2024 (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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I came across Art of the Title and found these interviews with the studios that did the title sequence for these films:
I checked a few articles that didn't have any information about the title sequence design, so these could be helpful in adding information to the above articles. Gonnym ( talk) 15:25, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
So, up until today I was pretty much content with how we’re handling the Multiverse stuff for Marvel. However, after I watched a video explaining what the tree at the end of Loki S2 could really mean I am not so sure anymore.
Some takeaways:
So what I’m suggesting/proposing:
Could this be all moot and be nothing more then me WP:SYNTHing? Possibly, but I’m trying to convey this in logic that the movies and shows themselves and the creators behind it have explained before, without trying to fill in gaps with stuff not explicitly said. Let me know what you think of this and if you have any alternate ideas to clean this up. MarioProtIV ( talk/ contribs) 22:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal to change the naming conventions of TV season articles from the current practice of XXX (season 1)
to XXX, season 1
or XXX season 1
. As such a change would affect a substantial number of articles, you are invited to participate in the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Move TV seasons from parenthetical disambiguation to comma disambiguation. Thank you.
InfiniteNexus (
talk)
04:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Shouldn't Kevin Feige have a higher MCU importance rating in WikiProjects? I noticed today he's marked as low importance. I know it isn't an exact 1:1, but Star Wars has George Lucas as a top importance rating, which I wouldn't be against putting Feige at the same rating within the MCU. -- Zoo Blazer 05:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Gonnym: Regarding your recent edits turning the line breaks into two separate links, is there a policy or guideline that says not to do this? I ask because I know this is also done on many other articles, including the several MCU films co-directed by the Russos and/or co-written by Markus and McFeely. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
It looks like Rotten Tomatoes no longer displays the X/10 ratings for TV episodes. If that's the case I'd assume most of the episode articles would have to remove the scores since it is no longer sourced. -- Zoo Blazer 04:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I am aware John Rocha is considered a subject-matter expert based on WP:SPS but may I ask how? The policy states that a reliable, independent source must publish them for them to be considered a subject-matter expert, but I don't recall a rumor from John Rocha specifically, not Jeff Sneider, being published by a reliable source. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that. In the Wonder Man article, his rumor about the series being canceled is reported on by ScreenGeek, a non-reliable source.
However, if it is actually the Hot Mic Podcast as a whole that is considered a self-published source and Rocha is basically grandfathered into being considered an SME, I strongly believe we should make an exception and stray from that as there is a significant disparity between Sneider's and Rocha's level of reliability, and he even admits this himself. Anytime he's about to share something he heard, he prefaces it by saying "Jeff's the credible one so takes this with a grain of salt," essentially admitting that his rumors are not credible, here's one example.
In that one example, he proceeds to claim that the Fantastic Four cast would be announced "by the end of next week", which of course has not happened. Ten days after his "Wonder Man is dead" claim, THR and Deadline said the series was still happening. On his latest stream, he said he'd seen reports that Ayo Edebiri might be pulling out of Thunderbolts. I've scoured Twitter to find such a report but I don't believe it exists. Three days later at the Golden Globes, Edebiri reiterated she's still in the film. (Besides, why is someone simply saying they saw a rumor even being mentioned on Wikipedia in the first place?) Later in that stream, he read out a fake Thunderbolts premise, thinking it was official, that actually traces back to one of those shady Marvel Updates accounts on Twitter, and the premise is clearly supposed to be a joke as it is almost a 1:1 match for the Suicide Squad plot.
I am aware that it is not up to Wikipedia editors to determine whether a source is credible or not, but I felt the need to share my thoughts and to see what others may think. What's happening here is we're basically considering a self-admittedly non-reliable source reliable and sometimes even reporting on things he says he saw online. As I said before, if Rocha is being considered an SME under the umbrella of the Hot Mic Podcast, I believe an exception should made in this case and his rumors should not be included on Wikipedia. What do you guys think? Aldwiki1 ( talk) 16:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I nominated Iron Man and/or Endgame to become vital articles if anyone has anything they would like to add to the discussion which can be found here. -- Zoo Blazer 19:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Are unused episode reference lists such as those at List of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. characters#Season 1 a valid usage? When a normal reference is unused it will throw an error "ref is not used in the content" and be placed in an error category. Using them this way bypasses this check. Additionally, we end up with a situation where have duplicate references (such as to "One of Us"). I think we should comment out the unused list so any future use is already ready, but when used, they should be added to the normal reference list. Gonnym ( talk) 13:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Yesterday, @
Gonnym went through a bunch of articles, files, and redirects related to Deadpool and Deadpool 2 and tagged them with |mcu=yes
. I was halfway through reverting them but stopped when they began re-reverting. You can see the subsequent discussion
here. We currently do not regard Deadpool and Deadpool 2 as part of the MCU on any of our articles, including
List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films, and neither does
Deadpool (film) nor
Deadpool 2.
I'm fairly certain we've discussed this before with multiversal films in general, but I guess this is trickier since Deadpool 3 is a direct sequel to the previous films. But even then, I don't think we can treat them as MCU because from a real-world perspective, they were still produced by a different studio and set in a different franchise. That Disney has decided to keep the same actor for Deadpool as they have done with several other characters (for fan-service/$$$ reasons) does not change this or make the previous two films canon. Gonnym, however, believes that Deadpool 3 connects to the MCU [so] it does mean that Deadpool 1 and 2 belong to the MCU
. They also argue that |mcu=yes
doesn't necessarily mean it's MCU, but I'll note that we don't tag any of the SSU films, or the X-Men films, or even other articles tangentially related to the MCU like
Walt Disney Studios (division) and
Marvel Comics. Thoughts?
InfiniteNexus ( talk) 18:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
|marvel=yes
and through
WP:FILM discussions that many of us are also on. Deadpool 3 was never an official title so one could argue that Deadpool & Wolverine is somewhat separate from the prior films, though it cannot be argued that it being in the MCU would make the prior films (let alone other X-Men films) worthy of the MCU tag. We don't (and shouldn't) do that for the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man films,
Elektra, the Venom films, or any appearance of Charles Xavier. Same with
X-Men '97. The comics articles don't and shouldn't use the MCU tags. Making an exception for the prior Deadpool films seems unnecessary and counterintuitive.
Trailblazer101 (
talk)
18:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree with InfiniteNexus, having a sequel in the MCU doesn't mean they're connected enough for the tag, should be a more explicit connection for the tag. Maguire's Spider-Man 1 and Garfield's The Amazing Spider-Man are more connected from their appearances in No Way Home but aren't and shouldn't be tagged. Indagate ( talk) 20:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I was getting to the content table and saw these adds after glancing at this discussion. I've removed the remaining Deadpool-related articles from being tagged. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello all! After some editing at Thor: Love and Thunder regarding the use of a hatnote for Marvel Studios: Assembled in its "Documentary special" section, there is now a whole discussion at Wikipedia talk:Hatnote#Hatnote overuse? regarding this and an alleged "overuse" of this, which would benefit from the perspectives of other contributors here, given we strive to keep our articles consistent. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 04:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)