This is the general discussion page for the wiki! New founders should leave a nice welcome message and encourage new visitors and editors to leave a note to get the conversation started.
Alternate Reality for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Future[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Guidelines for alternate universes have been established {{{sig}}}
Now that Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D./Season Five is over, it is clear without a doubt that episodes Orientation Part One to Past Life all take place in an alternate bad future. That means that every character that first appear in them, such as Deke Shaw, Flint or Sinara are not from the main MCU timeline, but more importantly, the characters who got into that future by taking the slow path (Leo Fitz, Elena Rodriguez, Robin Hinton) are going to have different lives from now on, requiring to split their articles into alternate counterparts. Should we treat it like Framework and create alternate selves pages for everyone involved, including alternate histories of events, locations and objects? HBK123 (talk) 09:52, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
The only characters that need alternate articles are the ones seen in The Last Day, which includes Leo Fitz' version, and Robin Hinton. For now, the Fitz we saw returning to the past until The End will be treated as the one and the same in the main article. No other articles need splitting, items, events and locations, even the Lighthouse, don't need an alternate article. Use the Framework situation as a template for how to deal with alternate realities.--Shabook (talk) 11:08, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
There are however different articles for vehicles and locations of the Framework. There is a different article for the Zephyr One, for example. Or even Washington D.C.--Elledy92 (talk) 11:48, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
And what articles would need alternate articles? Certainly not the future characters. And not the items, because no matter their different history, items like the Odium are exactly the same item, unlike Framework items which were digital recreations, not the same item.--Shabook (talk) 11:59, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I agree that items like the Odium or the Kree Battle Axe shouldn't be changed, since they are generic items. But important vehicles and locations like the Zephyr One of the Lighthouse should be splitted since they have a different story in the alternate future (the Lightouse being essentially turned into a space station).
Both the Lighthouse and the Zephyr One are the same physical items, with just another history in the ELE future.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
Also, What about merging all the timeline page after 2018 (related to this new timeline), into a single page about the events of the "Earth Destroyed Timeline"? --Elledy92 (talk) 12:05, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
Speaking strictly from an administrative POV, and not my personal opinion which I will keep for myself, timeline articles are fanon content right now, and all information is, or should be, available in the rest of well-sourced articles of this wiki.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I don't understand what the answer is to the question about page-moving, though. Is there going to be one collective page as Elledy has suggested? And which point is the wiki considering to be the point of divergence? When the team return from the future, when Coulson decides to slip the Centipede serum into Daisy's gauntlets, or something like that? It can't just be that when the team transported into the future they went into an alternate timeline, because otherwise Fitz could not have slept 74 years from the present into that future. The White Monolith might be considered capable of switching between timelines, but going to sleep isn't.BEJT (talk) 21:06, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
And that is something that we won't know for now, and we will probably have to wait until Season 6, which means more than a year. Marvel's rules for future timelines are that every alternate future is set actually in an alternate reality. That the ELE future is an alternate reality is not questionable anymore...--Shabook (talk) 21:16, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
OK, I think I get you. What does ELE stand for? And what do you suggest should be the existing articles? For example: "2017" showing both "2018" and "Earth Destroyed Timeline" (or whichever title) as "After"? Then 2018 just including this timeline's events and everything going forwards, and "Earth Destroyed Timeline" including the way things went down in the bad timeline, and the 2091-set episodes' events? Or at the point of divergence in 2018 a note referring to the other page? Basically, do you have an opinion on which pages should exist, and how it should be structured?BEJT (talk) 21:23, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
ELE stands for Extinction Level Event. Timeline for the altenate future should be condensed into a single article, similar to Before 20th Century. Not sure about the name yet.--Shabook (talk) 21:34, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
OK, cool. Just say whenever you think of a title. The only thing I wouldn't use is "Alternate" or "Alternative" because that suggests it was never going to be the case - but it was the original timeline and this new one is the change, as shown by Fitz's sleep and Robin feeling the shift to a new timeline. I might suggest "Original Timeline Future" or "Destroyed Earth Timeline Future" or "Lighthouse Timeline Future".BEJT (talk) 01:18, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
That the future the S.H.I.E.L.D. team saw at the beginning of Season Five was bad, there's no doubt about that. But that it was alternate - nope! Technically, it was the original future, the future that happened, the future they lived in. By changing the past (defeating Talbot) they have created an alternate timeline, a timeline they're now living in.--UskokS.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters - Playground 13:28, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
Technically, if the current reality is going to still be Earth-616 (which is a fact, as Marvel Studios shoots down anything so ambitious from Marvel Television), then the future where Earth is destroyed is an alternate reality with another numerical designation.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I understand that Shabook, but I feel Uskok is right since Fitz fell asleep in the present day and slept through into the future. The White Monolith might be considered capable of switching between timelines, but going to sleep isn't. As well as this, Robin feels the shift from the original timeline to the new timeline. Is it possible however that since time is fluid, according to Simmons at the end of the episode, that Earth-616 is the final, cemented timeline in the MCU, but the alternative futures essentially get discarded as different designations?BEJT (talk) 21:06, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Alternate Universes[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Guidelines for Alternate Universes have been established {{{sig}}}
First hinted in the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. episode appropiately named What If... with the existence of a parallel universe manifested through the Framework, and then fully developed throught the Time Travel exploits both in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Avengers: Endgame, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has finally introduced alternate universes branching from the main reality of Earth-616, as officially designated by Marvel Studios.
This has even been referenced in universe, with the quote by Deke Shaw:
"Well, actually, not according to the multiverse theory. You probably never heard of it, but in quantum physics, there's a theory that, for every universe, there are infinite parallel universes. So in my universe, you destroyed the planet. Maybe that just hasn't happened in...""
Now, this brings a lot of questions for how to deal with this whole new situation within the Marvel Cinematic Universe Wiki. We have now seen different versions of our characters coming from different alternate universes
Considering that there is an entire new TV series bound to introduce a new alternate universe within each episode, there is the need to clarify how to proceed with some things, ideally, before this series premieres.
Characters having alternate versions hailing from different universes. The two main ways to proceed are to have different articles for each reality, in the way the Marvel Database deals with them, or to have a "Tab system", similar to how the Mangog article is currently written now, but only for the biography sections where the counterparts' history is different.
Pages for the different realities. They are currently summarized in the Time Travel article, but probably not the best way, given not every alternate universe is created through Time Travel.
Other related proposals affecting the canonical articles of this wiki.
Please the comments relevant, concise and civil, in order to comment your opinions or proposals regarding this whole new topic--Shabook (talk) 17:07, August 27, 2019 (UTC)
This are my opinions and suggestion on the subject:
About characters: i'm not fond of the Tab system, so i vote for a page for each alternate character (since an alternate version of the same character might have a different codename of the main one, like for example What If's 1945 Steve Roger who is gonna be Iron Man). The Character's biography starting from the point where it diverges from the main character's biography.
Creating page for each reality shouldn't be a problem. The question is: what about the main one? As of today, the Earth-199999 page is more like a out-of-universe page, and analized the Marvel Cinematic Universe a multi-media. Should this be changed (separating the Marvel Cinematic Universe page with a new "Earth-199999" page)?
Categories for characters of different realities: should we create them?
Regarding the tab system. I believe tabs should be used for universes branched out from the MCU, since they share the same history up to a point, before the character was essentially "split" into two. This effectively communicates the idea of the branched versions of the characters, while also meaning that there are no complications such as editing a part of, say, Gamora's biography from her past (before the split) and having to make sure the exact identical edit is always also made on her counterpart's page.
Meanwhile, for entirely separate parallel universes, entirely separate pages I believe would be fitting, such as the system used for the Framework (when connected to the real characters, just using their pages, when not connected, creating a separate page).BEJT (talk) 17:59, August 27, 2019 (UTC)
All universes are entirely separate. Every universe covered in this wiki, by definition, branches from the main MCU universe, in the sense that their history is identical up to a point of divergence, but they are separate and different. All the universes seen in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., in Avengers: Endgame, and the ones currently hinted in the What If...? storylines, are an universe that shares its history with the main Earth-199999 up to a point of divergence. Same happens to characters. They are not "split in two", they just share their biography entirely until the point of divergence.--Shabook (talk) 18:25, August 27, 2019 (UTC)
I completely agree with BEJT about the tab ideas (as I suggested in a previous discussion about this topic). It is the best way to handle the same character but in different timelines, as mentioned in the Gamora example above. However, this should only apply to characters in different timelines, not different realties. For alternate realities, while I think that the system used for Framework characters could work and is probably the obvious and easiest way of handling it, I see some problems. The purpose of those "other uses" system is for versions of the chosen character that exist within that same world (Phil Coulson, but there is an LMD Coulson, a doppelgänger Coulson, a Chronicom LMD Coulson). I don't think alternate realties apply there, but at the same time am fine if that's how we approach it as I don't see another way to do so. However, I think we need to see how they do the What If...? show before we can make judgement. Apparently each episode is just one change, which could mean that it shares a lot of similarities to the main reality. Would we have to write all that in? Would we also apply the tab system if it meant a different branch in the character's history? Too hard to say as of yet.--Bennyhef234 (talk) 21:06, August 28, 2019 (AEST)
Different Timelines *are* different realities, that's the point. If they have to be treated as separated from the main timelines, than the characters of that reality should get a separate page also. I honestly found confusing and counter-productive to have characters like Original Nebula and Alternate Nebula on the same page, due to the nature of their relationship. --Elledy92 (talk) 17:47, August 28, 2019 (UTC)
Creating different pages for different timeline/reality pages is probably the most accurate way to go, but I can bet that it would be very problematic to get control over and would likely be a big task that we could only intrust within high up users. However, I still like the tabs idea.--Bennyhef234 (talk) 17:08, August 29, 2019 (AEST)
OK well the idea that they're entirely separate universes and not universes splitting isn't what the MCU suggests, but I understand if it's what the Marvel Multiverse blanket rules suggest - anyway, that's sort of another conversation. Still, when it's universes where the divergence is due to time travel, there's a difference to just being shown a parallel universe where things were slightly different, in my opinion (though that opinion might be coloured significantly by my reading of the MCU dialogue, concerning "splits" in the universe/timeline when it comes to removing Infinity Stones in time travel). So if What If...? is just, "Hey, this is a universe with a similar history up to 1943, except in this one, Peggy took the serum instead of Steve and then things played out differently from there", as opposed to "The Avengers went back in time to 2012 and since they removed an Infinity Stone, split the universe apart" (how I see it), or "The Avengers went back in time to 2012 but could not land in their own universe's 2012 because you can't do that, instead essentially causing a copy-and-paste of the MCU as a new universe and then causing a difference from their arrival", or whatever, then there still seems to be a difference to me with one being a coincidentally similar entirely separate universe and one being a universe at least in some fashion created through time travel.
Unless Shabook is saying that every time they time travel they just happen to land in a universe that's already sitting there and just each time fortunately for them happens to be identical to theirs. Even then, there's still a difference with the connections between the universes by the time-travelling as opposed to entirely divorced universes, but you would have less justification for a difference in treatment. Though I would argue that the MCU Wiki should be allowed some liberty from the Marvel Database Wiki and, even if strictly following the "Marvel Multiverse" blanket rules, if this is what those rules are, should in formatting at least somewhat present it the way just the MCU alone has presented, even if it's sticking in actual writing to the facts of the "Marvel Multiverse" at large.
Anyway, I agree that it's hard to be talking about considering What If...?'s formatting so early. In which case, just focusing on what we have now, I would argue that the tab format suits everything so far the best.BEJT (talk) 14:33, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
I asked to keep the comments relevant and concise. This thread is supposed to be to decide how to proceed with character dopplegangers hailing from universes differents to the main one, not about opinions on alternate universes and timeline issues. All that to just say "tabs".--Shabook (talk) 14:53, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
Right, but the answer isn't necessarily just tabs, it's tabs for one thing and pages for another, and that relies on an explanation. The concision point was why I cut down the message to make sure I didn't get too sidetracked into what I said was "sort of another conversation", trying to talk the bare minimum about that while still communicating the relevant points and reasons why certain options work only under certain interpretations, while also responding to all the points. The message also said "other related proposals affecting the canonical articles", so I thought that delving into that a little while avoiding a proper conversation about it would be more than fine.BEJT (talk) 20:24, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
As an editor on several wikis, I am familiar with both approaches. Here's my personal feeling about it:
Tabs are used on the Star Wars wiki to differentiate between the old and new canon. The downside to having them is that some readers inevitably tend to miss them (especially on mobile), they aren't good for SEO because one version will inevitably be WAY more popular than others, and when something only exists in an "alternate" version but not in the main one, the abscence of tabs can create confusion as to where the subject belongs.
Most other wikis dealing with alternate realities use a cental portal for each subject with disambiguation pages for each reality (Marvel wiki, DC wiki, Transformers wiki etc). I find this approach a lot more flexible because it can be extended as required: what will the tabs look like after What If...? introduces 15 different versions of Captain America? The way Marvel wiki currently covers both Endgame and AoS Season 5 is already pretty self-evident and neat (that wiki's general sparse coverage of non-comics nonwithstanding). Also, it would be a bit ridiculous for this wiki to have separate pages for Framework characters and Monolith Recreations (which by the way are are wrong: The Monolith creations are physical entities, not illusions; and the name Fear Dimension doesn't really apply to Izel's home planet - but that's a separate topic), but not for major Time-Travel deviations. HBK123 (talk) 21:44, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
That is a good point: What If...? could have multiple alternate versions of a character in the series, each different from the other. Would we then create a page for all 15 of them (for example)?
So, I don’t think I can suggest this enough, but the tabs idea seems the best way to go. In that way, if a character has the same up to a later point in their life, we don’t need to create a whole other page and then try and put in the respective character’s history that is the same as the original version. So when Cap doesn’t take the serum, we can put a tab at that section, which would then o for as long as it does, same for any other version that appears.
However, this will be something that would have to be done by the trusted editors.
And the tabs can be used for other version created for time travel, but I don’t need to explain why, I think we all get it.
So what do we think about the tabs?—-Bennyhef234 (talk) 08:04, September 4, 2019 (AEST)
To summarise my point, it essentially boils down to: If it's an entirely separate universe, it should be a separate page. If it's a connected universe, it should be on the same page (tabs). And this is mainly due to the fact that, the way the MCU has presented it, the 1995 Avengers: Infinity War Gamora flashback, for example, is canon to both Gamoras, because it's the same stem for both, only splitting apart (like in the Ancient One's diagram) in 2014. Not that it's only literally canon for original Gamora and just that identical events happened for new Gamora in her universe. Shabook disagrees, and that's where it got tricky, because my suggestion isn't just "tabs", it's tabs for a split character, pages for a separate character. But there seem to be some understandings where the character is in fact not split. So then I was trying to find common ground nonetheless and understand this interpretation, to judge whether that interpretation still considers the universes to be created by the time travel, or if they just happen to land in identical universes, because it changes whether or not there should be tabs. And ultimately saying that, even if it's the understanding that they happen to land in identical universes, maybe even then it should still be tabs when concerning time travel because, while there might not be much of a difference in the actual mechanics between that and the way What If...? seems to work, there is still a little difference in there and to the reader, the way it is presented in the films, it still makes sense for format to present it like a split with time travel, but a separate page entirely with What If...?. And that also, since all the things so far with different versions of characters are just to do with time travel, then all the things so far I would say should be tabs, at least for now. But with the conversation looking ahead, it's more complicated than that.BEJT (talk) 23:52, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
Every universe is equally separated, or equally connected. That is not a point. There are no "split or separate" characters. For every character, their backstory is the same. BUT THIS IS NOT; IT NEVER WAS, what is going to be discussed here. The question is how to deal with different versions of a same character, so, again, PLEASE, keep it concise, or we'll end this sooner.--Shabook (talk) 23:58, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
I know that's not the main point of discussion, which is why I'm not going properly into that topic and just skimming the surface of it. It had to be mentioned as it is relevant to the way the pages are laid out. As you say, you feel each universe is equally separated or connected, and that makes a difference to the suggestion.BEJT (talk) 00:14, September 4, 2019 (UTC)
It's not a matter of "I feel" or "I feel not". Facts are what they are. And each universe seen in MCU products is different. FACT.--Shabook (talk) 00:30, September 4, 2019 (UTC)
I think it makes more sense to handle character/location/item pages the way Gamora's was handled with the events from Endgame, and then on the timeline pages do it the way AoS S5 was handled in 2018. It's clean and simple, plus allows fro however many alternate versions is necessary, all of which in the "Biography" section.Jessica3801 (talk) 23:13, January 18, 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the tabs. As least that is a good start until we get a good grasp of all the facts. Season 7 could still change our facts even further. DarkraiShadowXZ (talk) 23:38, September 3, 2019 (UTC)
For the ones that are for the tabs idea, please use Leo Fitz and create a mock-up version detailing the three different versions of the character. Use the User:Shabook/Leo Fitz link to create it.--Shabook (talk) 00:01, September 4, 2019 (UTC)
I agree that tabs would be the best way to go for Multiversal doppelgangers of characters. Even if time does "split" or was always a different universe is irrelevant, Captain America in every episode of What If... or in every timeline seen in Endgame all have similar histories to varying extents and in each universe are recognized as being the same person. In that case, having every single variation exist on the same article and only being visible through selected tabs seems like the best and most logical way to go about this. Blizzard1289 (talk) 02:35, September 4, 2019 (UTC)
The main argument against tabs is that right now each character has no more than 2-3 alternate versions and they can be made to look pretty neat. But what happens when What If? introduces 10-15 new versions for most of the main cast. How cluttered is that going to look? And even more importantly, how is that going to look on mobile devices? The current example of tabs on Mangog page already does not display correctly for me. HBK123 (talk) 06:49, September 4, 2019 (UTC)
If there are 10-15 versions of a character, then I imagine there would just be 10-15 tabs. It would only appear as 1 version at a time, so it wouldn't be too messy. However, I don't know what to tell you about the mobile devices.—-Bennyhef234 (talk) 17:45, September 4, 2019 (AEST)
UTC)
That's a good point, maybe we could come up with only a fixed number of tabs? I.E. If a character has more than three alternate variations throughout the MCU then each new version gets its own page instead of a tab? Or another thought, we could just have one separate page dealing with all canon divergent versions of a character. For example, a page called "Alternate Tony Stark" that has different sections that each explain a different version of Tony Stark that's appeared in What If... or one of the films/TV shows, with the only other Tony Stark being the one that currently existing centered around the mainstream version. Blizzard1289 (talk) 00:21, September 5, 2019 (UTC)
Blizzard1289, that wasn’t my point. However, I have now just thought if we ended up having the alternate versions on the same page, how would the profile box look? I think we can have tabs for images, but I’m not sure about the other info.—-Bennyhef234 (talk) 15:42, September 5, 2019 (AEST)
What If? will also involve a lot of other stuff than just characters; locations, items, weapons, vehicles, etc. So you'll end up doing tabs for a potentially large number of pages. Dividing a huge part of the wiki into tabs sounds to me like too much work for just one animated series. Also, I think most of the time people come here to find info regarding things in the main timeline, not a short appearance in What If? that tells a different story. So I feel like the tabs system could sometimes confuse some people more. I don't know about other sources of different branches/realities/universes/alternate timelines, though they seem to have been dealt with pretty well so far, but for What If? why don't we just dump the events of each episode in one page and be done with it? If people want to check the alternate timelines, they go and find what they're looking for in the What If? page, and if they want to find info in the main timeline, which I think will be the case most of the time, they can find it just as easily without having to select tabs.--Mattcurrent999 (talk) 19:03, September 5, 2019 (UTC)
So did we come to a conclusion on how it will be handled?—-Bennyhef234 (talk) 01:16, September 23, 2019 (AEST)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Alias delimiters[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
References will serve as delimiters now {{{sig}}}
Can we separate all alias entries by commas? Many of the character articles have alias sections that are difficult to read because some alias instances are long phrases that take up multiple lines. - Yuvi3000 (talk) 11:13, September 16, 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Translations[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Proposal doesn't work {{{sig}}}
In cases where a non-English quote or alias is used on a page, the source is linked to it, but this requires the user to click on it, scroll to the bottom of the page and then return to where they were just to see the translation.
Can we maybe use this tooltip feature instead, so that it shows the translation when hovering over the text?
e.g.: Ungumbuali
What do you guys think? - Yuvi3000 (talk) 16:48, September 25, 2019 (UTC)
Ah, I've just tested and this doesn't seem to work when viewing on mobile. I guess that doesn't help then. Although if anyone has a better idea... - Yuvi3000 (talk) 16:52, September 25, 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Category for characters that had their minds uploaded[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
No replies in almost a year {{{sig}}}
Should Janet Stein, Zola, and Holden Radcliffe get their own category (Uploaded Consciousness? Uploaded Minds?) or should they be categorized as Artificial Intelligences?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 20:47, December 17, 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Sorcerers Category[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
I agree, though I would use a broader term like "Magic practitioners".--Gonzalo84 (talk) 18:23, January 3, 2020 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Wiki Background[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Respects are paid in other ways, no wiki has changed its background {{{sig}}}
As of when I'm adding this to the page (It's my first time doing this), Chadwick Boseman died three days ago. Because of this, I believe that the wiki background should be changed to something Black Panther related to pay respects to Chadwick Boseman. TheMaster1701 (talk) 19:02, August 31, 2020 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Marvel Theme Park Universe & Disney+ Wiki Affiliations[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Lack of participation, no coverage given to wikis outside the topic of this one. {{{sig}}}
I think the Marvel Theme Park could be affiliated to our wiki. But the Disney+ I disagree with. Yes, MCU will have a strong focus on Disney+ but several other franchises as well. - Marvelus 22:44 January 4, 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Multiple Upload Feature[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Use Special:Contact for Technical Issues {{{sig}}}
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Naming policy[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Policy is kept {{{sig}}}
Throughout the MCU, Wanda is only referred to by her name, and now WandaVision Episode 5 confirmed that she did not have a nickname. No "Scarlet Witch". Despite that, her article is still titled "Scarlet Witch", even though she is never referred to as such in the MCU.
A while ago there's been a suggestion to change article naming from superhero names to real names, since that's how they're usually referred to in-universe. So, Tony Stark instead of Iron Man, Steve Rogers instead of Captain America, Bucky Barnes instead of Winter Soldier, Peter Parker instead of Spider-Man, and most definitely, Wanda Maximoff instead of Scarlet Which.
I'd like to revisit that suggestion, as I do believe using real names would be better. -- Someborednerd (talk) 14:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
The credits for the movies, starting with Age of Ultron are the reason that particular article has that particular name in this wiki. SEO is, among other things, the main reason this policy has been implemented since this wiki's founding. It is one of the pillars of this wiki. Hard refusal, we are not going to vote about it every now and then just because somebody creates a sockpuppet account with 0 edits just to propose it until he gets satisfied. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to edit or read this wiki.Shabook (talk) 16:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
SEO?
I'm not an active contributor here, I've got no issues admitting that. I did made this account to comment on this, precisely because the usage of superhero names struck me as odd. MCU in particular tends to use real names over superhero names in referring to these characters, both in personal interactions and as public figures. This contrasts with the comics, where superhero names are more commonplace, and often the only public identity.
So, the fact that this wiki uses superhero names while even the comic wiki opts for real names seemed strange to me.
I didn't expect I would need to have a certain amount of edits to bring this up. -- Someborednerd (talk) 20:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
It's obvious that people foreign to a community don't get a say on the way the community's decisions, no matter the nature of said community. That's why people vote the mayor of their city, but not others. That's why people choose the date for their class tests, but not others. And this wiki's decisions are up to their active contributors, especially if foreign people want to come and change things under the erroneous thinking that we are somehow bound to what other wikis do. Even if that's so, we are following the general naming convention that Wikipedia follows, and the way that the MCU itself names its films.-Shabook (talk) 08:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Policy is kept, again. {{{sig}}}
And now just as Wanda was finally identified as the Scarlet Witch, another issue comes up with The Falcon and The Winter Soldier. The current holder of the mantle of Captain America is John Walker. His wiki article titles him as "U.S. Agent", even though that's a moniker used solely in the comics and not in the MCU. He's not known as "U.S Agent", he's known as the new Captain America.
The Disney+ subtitles title him as "Captain America" as well.
The current policy would suggest the right course of action would be to... rename the Captain America article to Steve Rogers, and transfer the title to the current holder, John Walker? Since that's what was done with Ant-Man and Shocker in accordance with that policy.
Though in my personal opinion this just shows how convoluted and unsustainable this approach is. -- Someborednerd (talk) 17:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
The "issue" that you try to create using incorrect or incomplete statements is already covered in the policy. Just as Elizabeth Olsen's character's article was named due to the way the credits for every movie she appeared in since 2015, Wyatt Russell's character was named as such due to the multiple sources for the casting available since 2019, and added as reference to the wiki to justify it.
Due to the (likely) possibility that the Captain America moniker trades hands multiple times during the course of the show, as confirmed by concept art and merchandise, it was publicly announced on March 9 (here in case you missed it) that any decissions to that particular move will wait until the season wraps. Patience and caution is advised when dealing with ongoing series. There is also a policy to explain general editing moratoriums and fully justify this one in case you missed the announcement. Also, MCU official merchandise for the looks he will receive over the course of the series (not during his introduction) refers to the character as U.S. Agent, therefore, your statement above is untrue either intentionally or not.
The correct course of action regarding the current policy would be, if Marvel decides to do so with their characters, to pass the mantle of Captain America to a different character if Steve Rogers is no longer him once this series is over. Therefore, in my personal opinion, reflecting what Marvel is doing shows that the current policy is the correct course of action, even if we as fans editing a wiki cannot keep up with the rythm a multi-billion dollar movie and TV studio does.
Also, I'd like to mention what Fandom reflects should be core rules for users in any wiki in their network, and we have already adapted to our community that members of the wiki are expected to contribute in line with the established processes and conventions, and that it's important for members to adhere to community guidelines for formatting. With all due respect to you, attempting multiple times to change the overall style of a wiki upon joining them (or without even joining given that you haven't made a single contribution to this wiki), is probably the exact opposite of that.
Your disagreement is noted, but with all due respect, your claims are disproven and therefore, dismissed.Shabook (talk) 21:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Textless Posters Legitimacy[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Not even a proposal {{{sig}}}
What would count for the legitimacy of Textless variants of posters if they are fan edited or not and if they were not edited by fans how can one tell the difference? Valyrian Wildfire There are no strings on me. 02:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Well, that's a pretty broad topic. Generally, you should not upload fan-edited textless posters if you know for a fact they are edited. If you're unsure, you should ask whoever uploaded to the source site before uploading them here, as currently there is no exception for them in the image policy in regards to fan edits. It's as simple as zooming in and looking for artifacts around the area where the logo would be. If you don't find anything out of the ordinary, you're probably looking at a legit textless poster. You suggested before that you wanted the image policy to be changed to allow fan-edited, so I think you should have just been more upfront about that here. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 04:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Fixing References and Gallery Links[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Resolved globally. {{{sig}}}
So this has been a lingering issue on the Wiki for a while now. Prior to UCP's implementation, </references> had an automatic width that adapted to room it was given by other objects. After UCP, the references bar now will always be 100% and will force itself down if there isn't enough clearance for its width, which has been problematic, as our gallery and quote list templates used this space previously, and looked off. On another Wiki that I had repurposed the MCU Wiki's column templates for, however, I discovered that they are capable of limiting the width of </references>, something I could for whatever reason not get to work with a simple div. With columns, the references are given exactly half of the width, and the gallery and quote templates are given the other half.
My main thinking in this is that we never use the column features in the current Reflist template anyway, so for us, it's no different than using </references>. This not only solves the issue of UCP's references bar, but also gives Reflist an actual purpose. I do want to look into adjusting the percentage widths that each column gets though, because ideally I would want the references themselves to have more. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 07:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Just learned that Phil Coulson actually does use column references, and I presume that is the same for other AoS cast members. I'm gonna have to figure out another way to format this template to allow for both columns when needed. I may end up just finding a new way to limit the width of the surrounding div entirely and make sure that the references box itself follows that. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 15:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I have entirely resolved the issue. Pages with column links will still function as they previously did, and the old References functionality has been restored. Now, however, Gallery and WikiQuote have to be placed *after* Reflist, not before. It is a function of divs that can unfortunately not be alleviated further without CSS, so we will just have to work to change that formatting in the source. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 13:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't think so. The Reflist was pushed to the bottom of the article, so it left the References heading section empty, followed by the External Links, and then the references themselves. I reverted the changes on the reflist template because it "solved an issue" by creating a worse one.-Shabook (talk) 13:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
That's my bad. The reason I did not notice was due to me editing only the Iron Man and Phil Coulson pages, one of which contained this issue in the scroll box with no indication and the other which had a div with clear:both; beneath it without me realizing that that was the only thing preventing float:left; on the new Reflist template. Thus, on pages without divs blocking them at the bottom, the rest of the content would fill the empty space (as all normal content in HTML is by default clear:none;) and thus would appear between references and the gallery and wikiquote templates. I think I can resolve it with overflow:hidden;. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 13:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Templates[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Navboxes are not implemented {{{sig}}}
Hi! Have you ever thought of using templates to refer to the works in the MCU? For example using {{WV}} to generate "WandaVision", and {{WV|1|9}} to generate "WandaVision: 1.09: The Series Finale". or better, "WandaVision: 1.09: The Series Finale", so that there will be links for both the show name and the episode name. I think using templates will help avoid typos or formatting inconsistencies when writing these names, and will also save quite some work (for example, you don't have to remember the name of every episode, as long as you know the number, to generate the correct result). MalchonC (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
This would essentially require reformatting the Wiki in every area where a reference exists, which would take forever. Not to mention the fact that most of the time we just copy and paste the text now so it's hardly an inconvenience, and it would increase loading times for pages marginally. If we had started off in a perfect world where we could plan to do that ahead of time, then yeah I might actually agree with this, but we did not and so it's just not viable. This template also appears to be very heavy on switch statements, which would again would probably increase load times. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 22:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
On Harry Potter Wiki we use this kind of templates heavily and I have to say I cannot notice the time difference of loading pages between this site and that one at all. And couldn't there be some kind of bot to automate it if it's indeed a good change? MalchonC (talk) 05:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
That's a big if honestly. Loading time differences are minimal, but they're there. The problem with the idea of this being a "good change" is that it needlessly complicates something with an established and perfectly convenient format that can easily be copy-pasted around the site as needed, while requiring mass edits for all older pages. It would also be confusing to both new and old editors who are either familiar with the old system or not knowledgeable of template formatting. - Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 03:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Well, just an advice. If you think the works are too much, then fine :) MalchonC (talk) 09:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Bit late of a response but I'm willing to put in the effort to create a template for Loki, maybe at Template:LokiTV, and mass edit all the pages. Matachak (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
That would be needed for each and every MCU film, episode, comic, novel, artbook, guidebook and media. Not just the latest 6 episode series. Too much effort, too little reward.--Shabook (talk) 18:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Game pages[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
These pages follow the general Guidelines for Alternate Universes {{{sig}}}
Hi! Since we make pages for characters from Alternate Realities in What If...?, I think we should make them for games as well. What I mean by this is that, characters appearing in What If... Captain Carter Were The First Avenger?, are given a /Super Soldier Peggy Carter subpage. The games are nearly as noticeable as the show. Currently, some pages have tabs for appearing in multiple games as seen on Mangog, however instead of using tabs we can use subpages. The only problem is finding names. The names used on List of Alternate Universes would need to be revised for subpages. Thoughts? AmazinglyCool(talk) 23:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
It is a work in progress that nobody has committed to.--Shabook (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Is there any way I can help? AmazinglyCool(talk) 13:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Apocryphal Articles and the Multiverse[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
These pages follow the general Guidelines for Alternate Universes {{{sig}}}
Now that Loki's first season has wrapped up and the Multiverse has been fully realized, I wanted to clarify if possible how we should handle the articles currently listed under the category Apocryphal articles. Should these also receive the alternate universe template and designation like the previously non-canon articles did, or should they be left where they are now? There's also the question of how we should handle the video-game pages. Should we remove the "Canon Status" section on the video-game articles that states the ways in which they contradict with the mainline MCU timeline and consider them part of an alternate universe, or should we leave it the way it is now? And, finally, should we upgrade the "Non-Canon Character Bios" on these video-game articles to full alternate universe character pages, or should we leave them as they are now? I can help out with any and all of these potential changes if need be, but I wanted to clarify wether or not any of them needed to be done first before I did anything. Logo8th (talk)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Flint Marko and Sandman[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Clarification given {{{sig}}}
Since we have Sandman (FFH) and Flint Marko (NWH) how will we add both since both are referred to as "Sandman." I have some ideas like Sandman (Earth-96283) or Sandman/Earth-96283. If we won't do that what will we do? -Ewysgarcoyustcrouiwetsnro - My Blogs - Message Wall - 04:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Uh, yeah, we're not doing any of that "Earth-96283" stuff. If Flint Marko/Sandman does indeed appear in Spider-Man: No Way Home, he'd get the Sandman designation, and the Elemental Projection that currently holds the "Sandman" page title would most likely be renamed to "Sandman (Elemental)" or "Sandman (Illusion)", etc. MJLogan95 (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
No. Sandman from No Way Home will eventually receive an alternate universe designation like every other character hailing from an AU whose name conflicts with a character from the main universe.--Shabook (talk) 10:41, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
While that is the norm, the reason I said what I said is because I was thinking of the Elemental Illusion Sandman from "Far From Home" as an Item more so than a Character, but yeah, the AU designation for Sandman works, too. MJLogan95 (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Venom[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Venom and Eddie Brock articles have been created after Kevin Feige's statement and NWH release {{{sig}}}
MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE
The post-credits scene of Venom: Let There Be Carnage has the character end up in the Marvel Cinematic Universe under mysterious circumstances. He listens to a broadcast from The Daily Bugle about Spider-Man's true identity with Venom licking at the screen and saying "That guy". I'm asking if we should create an article for Eddie Brock aka Venom since his third film will be part of the MCU. Ficboy (talk) 24:50, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
We won't create any article that doesn't come from Marvel Studios productions. If we do that with every character that interacted with the MCU, like in the comics where characters traveled to Earth-199999, we would have a bunch of articles unrelated to the core of the franchise. So no, no for the time being. The pages have already been protected from creation. Marvelus (talk) 01:25, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
But we have articles from Marvel Television (besides video games as well) that aren't from Marvel Studios but are MCU, so either way i think Venom should be added as well to this wiki as well, Tom Holland even winked at this on instagram saying "Are the rumors true 😏". We have stuff from other studios but from the same universe as Earth-199999 AND stuff from Marvel Studios but from different universes (What If), so Venom fits in one way or another on the criteria to be part of this wiki. Doctor49(Talk•Contributions) 23:10, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. The status of Marvel Television productions are widely different, as they have been acknowledged by both parties to be set in the MCU. Whereas we have Feige calling Venom "another universe" and Sony stating that Morbius isn't set in the MCU. And you totally do not understand how What If...? and Venom are so different from each other. Venom does not fit at all the criteria, yes, it does tie to the MCU franchise, but it is not part of the franchise, which is what this wiki covers, if that were the case we would create articles for comics from Marvel Comics that tie in to the MCU by having Earth 616 character travelling into MCU. Not the case. Marvelus (talk) 24:54, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Time Heist Alternate Characters[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
These pages follow the general Guidelines for Alternate Universes {{{sig}}}
I'm very sorry if this topic was brought up/dismissed before, feel free to just ignore this if that is the case. I think some of the Avengers: Endgame characters need separate pages for their alternate versions, created due to the Time Heist, similar to Thanos/Cosmic Time Heist and Loki/Time-Traveller. At the very least, Nebula should have one because main timeline Nebula and 2012 Nebula have their stories interfering with each other. I would personally say that alternate Steve Rogers and Gamora could use their own pages as well. This is a mere suggestion, if you think they don't need separate pages, that'd be 100% understandable. King Nasara (talk) 22:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
It's not that they don't need separate pages, they do. And one day they'll get them. The issue is that the wiki hasn't come up with a name for the Time Heist realities yet. Stuff like "/Time Heist", "/2012 Time Heist", "/Cosmic Time Heist" have been shot down. Because a name couldn't be decided, 2014 Thanos is temporarily listed /Cosmic Time Heist while 2012 Loki is /Time-Traveller. I'm sure Shabook will come up with a temporary name for 2014 Gamora by the time Vol. 3 gets here, but until he decides on a name, we can't make pages for the alternate people in Endgame. Maybe we can ask for that discussion to be reactivated at the Talk:Lighthouse after What If...? ends? MJLogan95 (talk) 01:15, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Organization Hub[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Created {{{sig}}}
One more suggestion, which I'm more sure about. We should create Hubs for alternate variants of organizations, similar to the ones that characters have. Take for example S.H.I.E.L.D., we have:
Main timeline S.H.I.E.L.D.
Framework S.H.I.E.L.D.
Time Heist S.H.I.E.L.D. (two of them)
Chronicom History S.H.I.E.L.D.
Captain Carter S.H.I.E.L.D.
Avengers Assassinated S.H.I.E.L.D.
Party Thor S.H.I.E.L.D.
Age of Ultron S.H.I.E.L.D.
With the introduction of the multiverse concept and shows like What If...?, the number of organization variants will be increasing in the future. So, instead of really long "See also", I think making Hubs would be a better alternative. King Nasara (talk) 23:46, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Conjecture Policy clarification[]
The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
Policy is kept as it is, and as is intended to be. {{{sig}}}
There is currently a part in the Conjecture Policy that states:
"Conjecture is permitted in ... situations:
Names for characters, places, and objects seen on-screen but not fully named otherwise. This particularly includes the full names of characters derived from Marvel Comics."
It however does not define what exactly "derived" means, which in theory (and occasional practice) enables minor on-screen characters to be identified as adaptations of comic characters who have very little in common with them (other than the common partial name). This can create false impression with readers and hurt the overall accuracy. I suggest a clarification addendum that would read as follows:
Names for characters, places, and objects seen on-screen but not fully named. This particularly includes adaptations of characters from Marvel Comics.
To be considered an adaptation of a character from the comics, the MCU character has to share with them a common identifier (such as partial name or an alias) and perform a closely similar function within the story or, alternatively, be identified as such in official promotional material such as (but not limited to) interviews with the cast and crew.
To be clear, this is specifically aimed at examples of Janice Lincoln, Victoria Snow and (most recently), Tomas Delgado, all of whom were only given first name in the credits and have been matched to comic characters whom they have very little in common with seemingly based on that name alone. It would not apply to other characters such as Leonard Samson or Cindy Moon who, while also given only the first name in the credits, have occupations and relationships to other characters greatly resembling those in the comics (Leonard's unique situation is indeed, as has been noted, a retcon).
Please voice your support, the reason for opposition or any comments or questions below. HBK123 (talk) 00:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello there, so far, we have had no problems with the use of this policy, the Tomas Delgado one was a mistake that carried on, the user who added it, has since removed it because there was never proof he was Tomas Delgado, it was a mistake. The examples of Janice Lincoln and Victoria Snow work in this case because of their background being similarly in the comics iirc. Plus, the SEO tool works better to get more viewers to this wiki. Cindy Moon was confirmed later but other web media after the release of Homecoming, and as for Leonard Samson... that is a retcon that is YET to happen. We act with what Marvel says, so far, that Leonard Samson is an adaptation of Doc Samson. The problem of Tomas Delgado was an isolated incident, one we always try to prevent. -- Marvelus (talk) 23:17, December 1 2021 (UTC)
I personally do not feel like there is enough with Janice and Victoria to claim their backgrounds as similar. Both are common names, so Victoria sharing a name with a Stark employee could easily be a coincidence, since there's like a hundred of those in the comics and she has absolutely nothing in common with Vicki "Vic" Snow otherwise. Janice is even less credible, as there's nothing whatsoever tying her to Beetle sides vaguely opposing Spider-Man. By the same logic she could be Janice Yanizeski / Joystick, another minor Spider-Man villain - the level of similarity is exactly the same.
As for the SEO, it absolutely should not come before accuracy and to even imply otherwise for me is shocking. HBK123 (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Considering that nobody voiced their agreeemnt towards this proposal in the past week, only that disagreement, and while that is a good enough reason to dismiss, there are a couple of others (such as this proposal going against the very nature and purpose of this wiki or its main reason being to facilitate your admittedly frequent copying of our information to an unrelated site).
This policy works exactly as intended. Both characters from No Way Home are named exactly as intended, and considering that plenty of MCU adaptations have less in common with their comics counterparts than these two, such as today's Wendy Conrad to delve no further, makes your main argument easily reversible.
So please respect that this site works differently than others, and has the right to do it, instead of trying to force us to change to make it similar to them.--Shabook (talk) 12:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.
Valyrian Wildfire There are no strings on me.
23:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- Blogs • Message Wall • Guestbook 04:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Valyrian Wildfire There are no strings on me. 04:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)