FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hey, so I understand why you didn't include the Instagram scenes as canon, but I was wondering if there was a way for them to be considered canon too: where either Sequoia later deleted the parts of her story (especially the ones where she talks about her boyfriend, as that would be embarrassing given her newfound relationship with Kahn. If that's where the story "splits" into separate videos, then that works. She talks about her increased love for Shaw during them, so it makes sense), or she made the videos and decided not to post them. I think they should be canon, but was wondering what you thought about that?

      Loading editor
    • View all 5 replies
    • Sorry for the late replies. I've been busy with other work and want to give proper responses.

      I get the argument. I think the way I see it, it's bending over backwards to fit in something which doesn't particularly have a need to be canon, and since it requires bending over backwards, I don't feel it's worth it. But it is indeed not contradictory either.

      I understand the "bonus scenes" name may be seen as such, but I also feel like if it weren't in an Instagram story format, then "bonus scenes" label would be taken to more clearly simply refer to some deleted scenes.

      That also said, some deleted scenes do get put onto the timeline pages so long as they don't contradict the canon, which these arguably don't. So it could be taken that these should be put onto the pages in the way of non-contradictory unofficial canon like the inspired canon comics and some deleted scenes, without counting as official canon.

      A third opinion might be helpful.

        Loading editor
    • I totally get it, a busy life is something I totally understand.

      And, "Sequoia's Vlog" is the only one I really see as bending over backwards. The other two fit in really well, and there is an out for it.

      That said, I get why that one could be considered annoying enough to disqualify all three.

      So, we'll go with a third opinion. I'm not particularly sure who to ask for this, would you like to be the one to do that then?

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey. I have a few question about Endgame. So when Steve Rogers takes the responsibility of returning the stones to their original timelines, are the containment devices shown at the end of the movie? Like for instance, was the Reality Stone converted to the Aether and contained in the extraction device that Rocket used and were the Space Power and Mind Stones encased in the Tesseract, Orb, and Scepter? Second question- where was Korath when Nebula and War Machine hijacked Star Lord's theft of the Orb on Morag? Was he ordered to sit that one out by Thanos, or did he arrive on Morag the same time as Nebula and War Machine stole the Power Stone from the Temple Vault? Finally, would the Time Heist end with the implication that the Stones were still active in the alternate timeline although their status on many pages is listed as destroyed?

      Loading editor
    • View all 9 replies
    • I know that this is confusing. But this is another opinion that explores the other possibility. So when Steve returns the stones to the moment they were taken back, like the Power Stone to Morag, then that would erase the timeline that War Machine and Nebula created when they stole it from Morag. Therefore, Thanos and his forces would have no incentive to travel back to 2023, and that is one way as to how the original events from 2014 could play.

        Loading editor
    • Anything is possible in those new timelines, though I and the writers would say that those new timelines cease to exist shortly after their creation.

      The idea with the 2014 example you give would be that Steve would return the Power Stone and Soul Stone to the appropriate times, which would then cause that timeline to crumble from the point of the Soul Stone leaving/being returned, i.e. the moment after Hawkeye leaves that timeline.

      Thanos and his army simply therefore, going by this interpretation, must have left the 2014 timeline before Hawkeye did, i.e. during the span of time that that timeline exists.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I’m sorry about what I wrote

      Loading editor
    • It's cool. Just relax a bit and have a look at this. It's not as simple as one piece of evidence.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey, you can delete this and you definitely don't have to answer if you're not comfortable (I know you don't want people knowing your identity here), but what are you pronouns so that I know how to refer to you in the future? I mentioned not knowing on the Timeline Discussion page, and that was my apparently-too-subtle way of asking, so I figured I'd ask. But if you don't want to tell me and would rather I stick with they/them, that's fine with me too. It's your privacy, I get that.

      Loading editor
    • Oh right, sorry, no. I noticed that and meant to mention, but forgot when responding. I'm male and use male pronouns. Good of you to ask, not a problem.

        Loading editor
    • Don't worry about it. You've got it!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Silvio
    In Daredevil, i figured it out who this Silvio guy is. Silvio is a former mobster and a mcu character without a surname but he is a MCU related version of Silvio Manfredi who is also a mobster and Silvio Manfredi is "Silvermane".
      Loading editor
    • View all 5 replies
    • my dream was to have disney buys the whole spider-man rights after Sony marvel universe & spider-verse marvel universe is done.

        Loading editor
    • BEJT wrote:
      Spider-Man and other characters involved are Sony characters. They're not borrowing them, they're collaborating with Sony.

      Sony:

      • Get to technically make the films.
      • Get to use their characters in their films.
      • Make most of the money off the Spider-Man films.
      • Are the primary studio owning the Spider-Man films.
      • Get to borrow some Marvel characters in the Spider-Man films (Captain America, Tony Stark, Nick Fury, Happy Hogan, Maria Hill, Talos, etc.).

      Marvel Studios:

      • Get to use characters Sony give them permission for in films beyond the Sony-owned Spider-Man films. e.g. Spider-Man in Civil War, Infinity War, and Endgame, and Ned in Infinity War and Endgame.
      • Get to have the Spider-Man films be part of their universe.
      • Get to have a lot of creative control over the Spider-Man films.
      • Get a small cut of the Spider-Man films' money.

      MJ and the Elementals are just creative choices, it's not a rights issue. They're Sony films, they can include the characters to any extent they want.

      Also by that contract, Marvel could not use thos characters for TV Shows. I don't think is a Marvel Television-strict rule only, i bet Marvel Studios won't be able to use those characters if the accords are not changed.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I head that the Cosmic Quest books ended up getting deemed not canon, which had me wondering if there were any books that were canon that aren't just novelizations of the movies? I've been looking for some reading to do during quarantine, and I could help with timeline placements as well if you need it.

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • I haven't started writing any of them properly, not beyond just the bullet point notes I took on those three. So if you are reading them anyway and wish to, feel free. I don't want to in any way push it on you or indeed in any way imply that I want you to spend money on any of these, but if you are buying them of your own volition and wish to write any of them up, you would be welcome to.

        Loading editor
    • Alright, thanks for letting me know! As mentioned previously, I intended on reading them anyway, so I'm glad to help.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • The Incredible Hulk lists two locations under Bruce Banner's Apartment Building, Martina and Bruce's individual apartments. Should they really be two separate articles from the main building? I personally see no use for them, as in total they make up around five minutes of the movie, I think less than a minute for Martina's. No meaningful information exists about them that wouldn't already be in the main article for the building, and the location tag would have so many items under it on the infobox. They were added as of April 4 it seems.

      Loading editor
  • I disagree with the "150px" size you are using for the articles, the "200px" is closest to the one assigned (250px) and it has worked perfectly in the 2018 page.

      Loading editor
    • View all 25 replies
    • I'm correcting it now. I was wondering about changing it to File:New York Battle.PNG, given that's a more general picture of the battle rather than a picture of the Avengers in their circle, which is from earlier in the battle, just before the universes split. Would that be OK?

      Edit: Can't really wait longer for a response, so I'm going to make that edit, I hope it's OK.

        Loading editor
    • Yes. It is okay! Sorry for the delay. I was studying.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Here is the the three media groups of MCU. your gonna like it as of exchange of thanking you for telling me about topher:

    MCU Direct: it is the best source for Marvel Cinematic Universe news and quality content.

    MCU Exchange: it can show the latest news, opinions and original content focused on the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

    and MCU Cosmic: Covering the MCU via news, rumors and reviews.

      Loading editor
  • https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/index.php?title=Comanche&diff=1017279&oldid=1012214

    ^ Hi, there. I was wondering what you meant by "can't edit page without censoring."

      Loading editor
    • As I understand it, Fandom imposed some rules recently, I believe last year, to try to prevent racist vandalism. As such, when editing a page, the presence of the N-word on the page then meant that no edits could go through anymore. When editing any pages with the N-word present, your edit wouldn't submit (the idea being to prevent people from putting that word onto pages as vandalism). So to proceed with editing pages like Comanche and Luke himself, the word had to be censored, otherwise no more edits would ever be possible.

        Loading editor
    • Weird. I can still edit it, and the censorship wasn't done to all pages; Luke Cage's page I believe still has it, and edits were being done. I edited it myself, although that may be due to FANDOM user privileges. Seeing as it's not vandalism in this case & merely writing out the dialogue as is, I think it should be fine? In any case I'll speak with a Wiki Manager about it. Thanks for responding.

        Loading editor
    • They might have undone the rule in the time since if they received complaints about the fact that it stops usage of the term just in a quote sense.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+