Jump to content

Talk:Daredevil: Born Again: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
 
(29 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
| minthreadsleft = 4
| minthreadsleft = 4
}}
}}

== "Revealed" ==

The word "revealed" is used no less than <strike>eight</strike> '''twelve''' times in this article. What are we, a tabloid? This is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Please see [[MOS:SAID]]. {{tpq|Said, stated, described, wrote, commented, and according to are almost always neutral and accurate.}} That's from the actual WP Manual of Style. We're not a Marvel press release to be guarded by fanboys. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 21:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

:There is nothing biased about saying "revealed" when information is revealed. Additionally, the change you made in the article from "revealed" to "announced" is not correct as it suggests that there was an official announcement from Marvel which is not the case for that information. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 00:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

::I didn't claim there was anything "biased"? What I write is there, immediately above - the Manual of Style says to use {{tpq|said, stated, described, wrote, commented, and according to}} as they {{tpq|are almost always neutral and accurate}}. You're reading a ''lot'' into "announced" that isn't there. But fine. "According to" or "stated" will work even better. Do you have a preference? [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 00:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
:::You said "revealed" is not neutral or accurate, which is nonsense. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 00:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

::::Again, no. I did '''not''' say either of those things. What I said is directly above, and in two edit summaries. "Revealed" is to be avoided, in favour of {{tpq|said, stated, described, wrote, commented, and according to}}, per the MOS. I don't know why you don't get this, or why you're putting words in my mouth. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 11:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::MOS does not prohibit the use of "Revealed". Word use on Wikipedia is not restricted and you trying to force your own preferred word use is becoming disruptive. You implied through the MOS that because "revealed" is not listed among the other words that are "almost always neutral and accurate" that it is somehow incorrect, which is untrue. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 16:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

This is becoming tiresome. You keep putting words in my mouth. Stop - do not do that. ''I'' "implied" nothing. I stated what I stated, above - it's there in black and white. ''You'' inferred meaning. Look, this is what the [[WP:MOS]] says: {{tpq|''Said'', ''stated'', ''described'', ''wrote'', ''commented'', and ''according to'' are almost always neutral and accurate. Extra care is needed with more [[loaded term]]s. For example, to write that a person ''clarified'', ''explained'', ''exposed'', ''found'', ''pointed out'', ''showed'', or ''revealed'' something can imply it is true, instead of simply conveying the fact that it was ''said''. To write that someone ''insisted'', ''noted'', ''observed'', ''speculated'', or ''surmised'' can suggest the degree of the person's carefulness, resoluteness, or access to evidence, even when such things are unverifiable.}} Why are you objecting to terms that the MOS says to use? The article had no less than 12 instances of "revealed", which was ridiculous. Who was ''hiding'' this information? Why does the article need to be that repetitive? Or written in Dail Mail-esque? "According to ''Deadline''", "The ''Hollywood Reporter'' announced", "In April, Cox was said to..." are all ''perfectly valid'' and non-sensational English, mandated by the MOS. Your [[WP:OWNERSHIP]] is the only disruptive thing here. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 16:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

:This article is not using repeated words in excess to the point where I would be concerned. (I still only count eight instances of "revealed", not sure where you got 12 from.) "Revealed" is attesting to a truth, especially in the case of this article and each of the contents that are discussed as being revealed by either Marvel, the trades, or other means of a copyright filing or set photos. Using "said" for a trade report is somewhat incorrect as the trades can not speak, but "stated" would be correct when referring to what the specific reporters themselves have said in their report (though this wording, and "according to Deadline", etc.) would be needlessly excessive in addressing the facts. We do not need to say in prose where the reveals came from, just that they are a fact, which the current wording accurately and clearly addresses. Clearly there is a disagreement here over the interpretation of the MOS' intent and word usage, so these concerns may be best addressed at the MOS if you have a wider issue, though I don't think this is something that requires much concern to be had. One would argue you coming in and being disruptive in your excessive verbiage charges is not constructive. No one is "hiding" any information here, so it is not clear what you are trying to get across. "Revealed" is not a loaded term as it is not too vague and is quite accurate in these instances. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 20:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

::"You coming in and being disruptive"?! Seriously?! Classic [[WP:OWN|ownership]] and now [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]]? Jebus! Cop on. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 23:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
:::That is not an attack on you. The wording has been largely unchanged for a few years and months until you changed it. When you were reverted, you reinstated it and furthered your alterations while a discussion was ongoing. That is disruptive and not in-line with [[WP:BRD]]. Making allegations does not help your case. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 23:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

::::Your wording - coming in and being disruptive, excessive verbiage - is absolutely a personal attack. And you need to remember, this is a wiki. It ''does not matter'' that something has been largely unchanged for a few years and months" (article is less than two years old...) - people will come and improve things. Your blanket revert of 8 changes is a clear example of [[WP:OWN]]. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 09:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::In the name of still being on topic in discussing the article, your edits were contested and you reinstated them while they were being discussed and after they were reverted. This is disruptive behavior and against [[WP:BRD]]. Saying they were "excessive verbiage" is not a personal attack, I merely said what I deemed it to be: introducing unnecessary words to convey what has already been done but in a longer or different way. Unless you provide a more convincing rationale for why this wording ought to be changed (the wording presently used is not prohibited by the MOS), then that's what you should focus on here. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 16:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::And once again, I'll repeat, the MOS specifically advises to ''not'' use reveal. It's used multiple times in this article. One or two uses ''might'' be appropriate, in context. (I can identify none where another word wouldn't be better, but y'know, compromise). [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/reveal Reveal]: "to make known or show something that is surprising or that was previously secret"; "to allow something to be seen that, until then, had been hidden". ''Said'', ''stated'', ''described'', ''wrote'', ''commented'', and ''according to'' are almost always neutral and accurate and would in all cases be a better choice than repeating "revealed" in this article. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 13:10, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


== Cast ==
== Cast ==
Line 64: Line 40:
::Yes, I think with what we're proposing, that still leave this open to being possible once things are confirmed either way (if James is still in the show or not, or if the character itself is or isn't in the show). - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 21:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, I think with what we're proposing, that still leave this open to being possible once things are confirmed either way (if James is still in the show or not, or if the character itself is or isn't in the show). - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 21:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)


== Is this really a miniseries? ==
== Edit warring ==


I haven't seen any confirmation about it being so, and that is why I asked this. Thanks. [[User:Mattgelo|Mattgelo]] ([[User talk:Mattgelo|talk]]) 10:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
{{u|Trailblazer101}} and {{u|176.201.27.134}} - this is the article Talk page. Can I suggest ye both use it, rather than edit warring? Can ye both also please use edit summaries to explain your edits? Both of you, please take this as your warning that you are about to breach the [[Wikipedia:3rr|three-revert rule]] and may be blocked as a result. Discuss your changes, come to a consensus? [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 15:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


:Thank you, though I am well aware about the 3RR rule. The IP is blatantly vandalizing with unsourced additions and I was in the process of requesting page protection to prevent it from further happening. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 15:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
:It is sourced in the "Creative overhaul" section as being a big "limited series", which is just used interchangeably with "miniseries". It doesn't have two seasons (which would not make it limited or a miniseries) but rather is split up into two parts. Most of Marvel Studios' MCU series are miniseries by definition unless they get additional seasons, and there is consensus to use the "miniseries" term for these series. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 19:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
::There's confirmation that season 2 is filming soon: https://x.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1822119928180117798?s=19
::So I guess it means this show is no longer a miniseries, and a full-fledged series like the Loki series. [[User:Mattgelo|Mattgelo]] ([[User talk:Mattgelo|talk]]) 06:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
:::I think we may want to wait for further clarification on this season wording, as we have it sourced that may not be exactly used due to some contractual reasons. It may not be the case anymore, though it is something to be mindful of. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 06:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
::::[https://deadline.com/2024/08/daredevil-born-again-d23-1236036322/ Looks like] Feige specifically said season 1 is coming next year and season 2 is filming soon, so if there were contractual reasons for not saying season those may have been resolved now. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 07:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::I added this source but haven't tried to update the wording we have around the article yet. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 08:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::I think we should adjust the wording to be season 1 is nine episodes with season 2 in the works, and previous reports were it being 18 episodes, or classified as "parts". - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 02:46, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::We can use this [https://tvline.com/trailers/daredevil-born-again-trailer-season-2-filming-1235313443/ TVLine] source as well if needed, as they were the site Cox told about 9 episodes being filmed so they bring it all together: {{tq|Cox told TVLine that nine episodes were filmed, to premiere in March 2025 — and now comes word, via the cast’s appearance at D23, that filming on a second season will begin “soon.”}} - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 02:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I have updated the article with this wording and source. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 09:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::::I think that we should also consider the second season as the final one exactly like [[Andor (TV series)]]. In fact this is a 18-episode limited series with 2 seasons consisting in 9 episodes each one. [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 08:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Do you have a source to support that? - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 12:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Of course. [https://abc7.com/post/daredevil-born-will-reunite-original-cast-seasons-disney/15183017/ This article] specifies that the series will have two seasons. [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 13:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::I don't think it specifies that there will only be two seasons, just that there will be at least two. And even if there are only two seasons, that would be stretching the common definition of "limited series". - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 16:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::In fact I didn't say that it should be indicated as a "limited series" but only to consider the second season as the final one when the first one will have been distribuited on March 2025. This has been done also for [[Andor (TV series)]. [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 16:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::There is no source confirming the second season will be its last. You are just [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS|assuming based off of what another separate work did]], which is not how Wikipedia works. Unless you have a source confirming there will only be two seasons, this is pure [[WP:SPECULATION]], which is not allowed. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 23:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Now it's not anymore "pure [[WP:SPECULATION]]" because [https://geekculture.co/daredevil-born-again-march-2025-disney-plus-premiere-date/ this article] confirmed that the series will run for 2 seasons with a total of 18 episodes. [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 13:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::That source does not confirm this. It is not a great source to begin with and it is not reporting that there will only be two seasons, it is just discussing what is known so far. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 13:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::If it isn't a great source, why it is used in [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?search=geekculture&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1 various pages]? [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 14:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::[[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS]], just because another article does something does not mean we should do it here. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 14:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::Anyway also Deadline, which should be a "great source", called Daredevil: Born Again a "two-season series" in [https://deadline.com/gallery/daredevil-born-again-jon-bernthal-punisher-set-photos/ this article]. [[User:Tizio Incognito|Tizio Incognito]] ([[User talk:Tizio Incognito|talk]]) 14:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::The official announcement of a second season came after that article, so it is out-of-date. I still wouldn't think that supports what you want it to support. We are in [[WP:NOHURRY]], if this is truly going to end after two seasons then we will get a more definitive source to support that claim in due time. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 14:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)


== Episode count ==
::Adding unsourced content is ''not'' vandalism. The proper response is to either add a reference yourself, or to add a 'citation needed' or 'fact' taf. If you used edit summaries, then the IP would know ''why'' they were being reverted. Seems to be a [https://www.empireonline.com/tv/news/daredevil-born-again-hires-new-showrunner-plus-justin-benson-and-aaron-moorhead-to-direct/ perfectly legit] addition, at that. I can't report you for breach of 3RR unless I issue a warning, but if you're aware of 3RR, the question becomes one of why are sailing close to breaching it instead of ''you'' opening a discussion with the IP... [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 15:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
:::The sources in the article do not contextualize how many episodes these crew worked on at large, so the IP was either making assumptions ([[WP:SYNTH]]) or making it up. And the repeated additions through different IPs is rather disruptive, if not veering towards vandalism. I already warned the IP on one of their talks. Looking into the sources proves this is essentially becoming vandalistic behavior on the IP, and not some good faith content that ought to remain in the article. I stand by my edits regardless and didn't think they would cause a stir in reverting unsourced additions by several IPs given this article's recent popularity among the internet. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 16:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
:::Also may I point to [[WP:DONTFEED]]. There is no use in attempting to garner a consensus with an IP adding unverifiable content which no source confirms in the manner they were added, especially in this instance where it constitutes vandalism after multiple reverts. The only solution is to revert to the [[WP:STATUSQUO]] and report the IP or protect the article (which I have already requested) to avoid such disruptive editing form occurring again. Your prior discussion at this talk makes me question your intent here, though I'll assume good faith on your part. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 16:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
::::Nonethless, I reverted three different IPs on three different days, the 28th, 29th, and the 30th. This was not close to violating the [[WP:3RR]] in the slightest as you proclaimed, which states: "{{tq|An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert.}}" My edits were not within the 24 hour period, and as such, there is no violation or warning to be had here. The article is protected now from vandalism, so there is no point in prolonging this discussion with baseless allegations and unnecessary compromising with what is evidently a vandalism account. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 04:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::Here is the page's [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Daredevil:_Born_Again&action=history edit history]. You clearly have two reverts of the same material within 24 hours. That's why I gave you a 3RR warning - to ensure neither of ye breached the 3RR rule. It's perfectly reasonable to issue a warning where there is evidence of edit warring, even where neither party is actually on three reverts. So no, not "baseless." And again, adding content is not vandalism. I've warned you already about [[WP:OWN|ownership]] on this page, maybe pay heed. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 11:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)


Cox confirmed that they have filmed 9 episodes for the show. I don't think that means that the other 9 episodes won't be made, but potentially the plan has changed. I know there is a source out there saying Marvel is going to see how the first 9 go before making more, but it isn't a reliable source. Sneider tweeted about this as well but doesn't have any extra info to add yet. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 16:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Against my better judgement, I'll bite. {{u|Trailblazer101}}, ''why'' is "lethal" apparently "more descriptive" for this character than "deadly" is? They are literally synonyms! What are you "remaining consistent" with, and who says, and where, that "It is best practice to remain consistent in how we convey such descriptions"? And lastly, why do you feel the need to revert pretty much everyone other than you who edits this page? Seriously, [[WP:OWN|ownership]], much? Two of us think the change was an improvement. One doesn't. Self-revert. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 16:34, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


:I figured this was the case. I'm sure there will be some more concrete reports in the coming months as to when they film the remaining 9 eps (which I know rumors have said would be in November). I agree that they are most likely still happening, though it's definitely something to keep an eye out for more context. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 19:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
:It is better to be consistent with the character descriptions across these articles (ie ''[[Daredevil (TV series)|Daredevil]]'', ''[[The Punisher (TV series)|The Punisher]]'' and their respective character lists) than to have this one be an outlier from those. "Lethal" implies a more violent, harmful, or destructive nature than what "deadly" merely conveys. I reverted the change because it was unexplained and unnecessary to change such wording. I don't see the need for me to self-revert my edits as these are all constructive differences in perspectives, and I don't think any of this is worth fighting over. I know I don't "own" this article or others, so please kindly stop throwing that around and [[WP:AGF]] and be [[WP:CIVIL]]. Making demands for an editor to self-revert is not really helpful. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 16:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


== First and second seasons?==
::Fine, then. As 'deadly' and 'lethal' are literally synonyms, and two of us prefer the new wording, then I'll change it back. Per [[WP:CON]] and [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS]]. I absolutely assume good faith, but only up to a point - you can't deny there's absolutely a pattern of you reverting other editors on this and other related articles. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 17:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
:::I think lethal makes sense for the consistency across related show articles. [[User:Sariel Xilo|Sariel Xilo]] ([[User talk:Sariel Xilo|talk]]) 17:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
::::Nope, there is absolutely ''no'' requirement for consistency across related show articles. [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS]]. But hey, if you're copying stuff from other articles to use here, or ''vice versa'' (no matter how ungrammatical the construction), you ''are'' using proper attribution, aren't you? And I'd see that in the edit histories? ;-) [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 17:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
:::::No one said there was a requirement for consistency, though it is a good rule of thumb to follow for our readers. and asking such questions in that manner doesn't seem that civil. The [[WP:STATUSQUO]] applies here. This really isn't that big of a deal and is kind of being blown out of proportion. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 17:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
:::[[WP:BRD]] mainly applies here. Once a bold edit is contested, you should not restore it without letting the discussion pan out. Now it is 2 for and 2 against, so this is clearly a contested edit and should not be restored again. I'm not denying or admitting to anything here, and am trying to focus on constructively improving the article, which is what this talk should be about. Save editor's actions for their talks. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 17:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
::::Consistency absolutely trumps the personal feelings of one editor at one article. This isn't a [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS]] argument, it's an MCU taskforce argument of creating consistency between all our articles (where appropriate) to provide a better experience for readers and to help on our progress towards various Good Topics. That doesn't mean ignoring the needs of individual articles for the sake of consistency across the topic, but in this case there is no special need for there to be a difference since the words are synonyms (as you pointed out Bastun). - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 21:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


Currently, this article refers to the episode count as two halves of nine each. However, recently at D23, Kevin Feige has referred to the first 9 episodes as "season one". Should we update this for this article as well as for the info of the series at the [[Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Five]] article? [[User:AxGRvS|AxGRvS]] ([[User talk:AxGRvS|talk]]) 21:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
== Is this really a miniseries? ==


I haven't seen any confirmation about it being so, and that is why I asked this. Thanks. [[User:Mattgelo|Mattgelo]] ([[User talk:Mattgelo|talk]]) 10:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
:This has already been raised above in [[#Is this really a miniseries?]] - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 08:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

:It is sourced in the "Creative overhaul" section as being a big "limited series", which is just used interchangeably with "miniseries". It doesn't have two seasons (which would not make it limited or a miniseries) but rather is split up into two parts. Most of Marvel Studios' MCU series are miniseries by definition unless they get additional seasons, and there is consensus to use the "miniseries" term for these series. [[User:Trailblazer101|Trailblazer101]] ([[User talk:Trailblazer101|talk]]) 19:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:36, 21 October 2024

Cast

[edit]

Deadline in their report on Bethel highlight Margarita Levieva, Arty Froushan, Sandrine Holt, Michael Gandolfini and Nikki M. James as still being part of the cast https://deadline.com/2024/01/daredevil-born-again-wilson-bethel-bullseye-marvel-disney-plus-1235803004/. Rusted AutoParts 02:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added those actors back to the cast list and noted their castings were reaffirmed. Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I interpreted that statement in the article as just regurgitating the cast from previously, not necessarily a reconfirmation that they were returning on the restart. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:33, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am a bit concerned about what has been done with the cast over the last few days. TVLine was used to remove most of the cast and then Deadline was used to restore some of those, but neither of those articles support those actions in my opinion. TVLine is speculating that anything could change with the previous cast following the creative overhaul, not reporting that it is possible that they will be removed, and based on the other reporting that we have it sounds like most of the existing 6 episodes will be retained. So I don't think we can use that TVLine article to support removing the previous cast members. But even if we did, I agree with Favre that the Deadline article is not reconfirming the shorter casting list, they are just relisting some of the previously reported cast members. I think we need to restore the full cast list (i.e. add Walton, Johnson, and Guevara back to the cast list) and wait until there is a source that is actually reporting their removal from the series. I do think we can use the TVLine article as we have it in the Casting section to say it is unclear whether they will all be retained, but I don't think we should keep the Deadline article in that section except for Bethel. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can definitely see the concerns to be had with both these articles, and I would support restoring the entire cast section and making necessary adjustments, including not using the Deadline article to source that janky wording. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have boldly restored the cast listing and removed the additional Deadline ref tags, speculative details. Trailblazer101 (talk) 23:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamstom.97 and Trailblazer101: Just catching up. I still feel we need a way to indicate who was cast prior to the overhaul as we don't truly know who's character's will be retained with whatever they are reworking with what was already shot. That was the reasoning behind my reformatting and using the TVLine source as a way to state that. Much like the directors and the previous known writers, we should provide some delineation in the cast section for reader to know these actors may still be involved, but we aren't fully certain yet. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just chiming in to say that four of the previously-cast actors have been spotted on set since filming resumed: Levieva, Froushan, and Gandolfini with Walton. Not sure if these can be mentioned in the article in any way, just sharing for added context. Aldwiki1 (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is helpful. I was able to add Levieva and will go about adding those other two. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These set photo sources reaffirming their involvement is more definitive verification indeed. I'm still not certain if we should prop up the TVLine article in a more prominent manner in the "Cast" section as it was not necessarily a report and was more so just expressing uncertainty given the creative overhaul happened. I don't think we necessarily need to list every time an actor already cast is "reaffirmed" to be in the series given there was no conclusive indication or report any actors were actually being removed or had the potential to be. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so I wanted to bring this discussion back. With Zurer now confirmed to be returning (and thus replacing Holt), I also came across this article (which we can't use as a reference) that mentions that Nikki James may also have been written out of the series. I think we need to make clear in the cast section actors who were previously known to have been cast but have not been reconfirmed following the overhaul. That would currently be Nikki James; Clark Johnson; Zabryna Guevara; Michael Gaston; Marc Geller; and Harris Yulin. @Rusted AutoParts, Adamstom.97, Trailblazer101, and Aldwiki1: since you all discussed previously, if you would like to add any new thoughts. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should we hide them from the cast list/lead/infobox until they are reconfirmed, but leave their casting details since we don't have a source either way? - adamstom97 (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support infobox and lead removal certainly at this time, and possibly just a prose sentence listing them in the cast section (and leaving all that we have in casting already). So something like Prior to the series' creative overhaul, the following were known to be involved with the series: Nikki M. James as Kirsten McDuffie; Clark Johnson as Cherry; Zabryna Guevara as Sheila Rivera; Michael Gaston; Marc Geller; and Harris Yulin. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support that, given the skepticism and ambiguity on if they are actually still attached. While I do believe some of these cast changes were inevitable given the overhaul, nothing has really been concrete (save for the Vanessa reverse recasting). Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hiding them at the least makes sense. Given there being no means of corroborating they had come back following the overhaul, nor if their roles got recast with previous actors ala Vanessa, hiding at the least keeps them embedded on the page until they're able to be reconfirmed. Rusted AutoParts 21:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go ahead with the change! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This can't be used but back in March someone who visited the set and took some photos said they spotted a trailer for Nikki James' character Kirsten McDuffie. And two days ago they reaffirmed that it was indeed for that character, which might indicate that McDuffie is still in the show. We don't have definitive proof since they only took a photo of Vanessa's trailer but I thought I'd share regardless. Aldwiki1 (talk) 21:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think with what we're proposing, that still leave this open to being possible once things are confirmed either way (if James is still in the show or not, or if the character itself is or isn't in the show). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really a miniseries?

[edit]

I haven't seen any confirmation about it being so, and that is why I asked this. Thanks. Mattgelo (talk) 10:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is sourced in the "Creative overhaul" section as being a big "limited series", which is just used interchangeably with "miniseries". It doesn't have two seasons (which would not make it limited or a miniseries) but rather is split up into two parts. Most of Marvel Studios' MCU series are miniseries by definition unless they get additional seasons, and there is consensus to use the "miniseries" term for these series. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's confirmation that season 2 is filming soon: https://x.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1822119928180117798?s=19
So I guess it means this show is no longer a miniseries, and a full-fledged series like the Loki series. Mattgelo (talk) 06:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we may want to wait for further clarification on this season wording, as we have it sourced that may not be exactly used due to some contractual reasons. It may not be the case anymore, though it is something to be mindful of. Trailblazer101 (talk) 06:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like Feige specifically said season 1 is coming next year and season 2 is filming soon, so if there were contractual reasons for not saying season those may have been resolved now. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added this source but haven't tried to update the wording we have around the article yet. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should adjust the wording to be season 1 is nine episodes with season 2 in the works, and previous reports were it being 18 episodes, or classified as "parts". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can use this TVLine source as well if needed, as they were the site Cox told about 9 episodes being filmed so they bring it all together: Cox told TVLine that nine episodes were filmed, to premiere in March 2025 — and now comes word, via the cast’s appearance at D23, that filming on a second season will begin “soon.” - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the article with this wording and source. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we should also consider the second season as the final one exactly like Andor (TV series). In fact this is a 18-episode limited series with 2 seasons consisting in 9 episodes each one. Tizio Incognito (talk) 08:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source to support that? - adamstom97 (talk) 12:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. This article specifies that the series will have two seasons. Tizio Incognito (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it specifies that there will only be two seasons, just that there will be at least two. And even if there are only two seasons, that would be stretching the common definition of "limited series". - adamstom97 (talk) 16:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact I didn't say that it should be indicated as a "limited series" but only to consider the second season as the final one when the first one will have been distribuited on March 2025. This has been done also for [[Andor (TV series)]. Tizio Incognito (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no source confirming the second season will be its last. You are just assuming based off of what another separate work did, which is not how Wikipedia works. Unless you have a source confirming there will only be two seasons, this is pure WP:SPECULATION, which is not allowed. Trailblazer101 (talk) 23:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now it's not anymore "pure WP:SPECULATION" because this article confirmed that the series will run for 2 seasons with a total of 18 episodes. Tizio Incognito (talk) 13:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That source does not confirm this. It is not a great source to begin with and it is not reporting that there will only be two seasons, it is just discussing what is known so far. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it isn't a great source, why it is used in various pages? Tizio Incognito (talk) 14:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, just because another article does something does not mean we should do it here. - adamstom97 (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway also Deadline, which should be a "great source", called Daredevil: Born Again a "two-season series" in this article. Tizio Incognito (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The official announcement of a second season came after that article, so it is out-of-date. I still wouldn't think that supports what you want it to support. We are in WP:NOHURRY, if this is truly going to end after two seasons then we will get a more definitive source to support that claim in due time. - adamstom97 (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Episode count

[edit]

Cox confirmed that they have filmed 9 episodes for the show. I don't think that means that the other 9 episodes won't be made, but potentially the plan has changed. I know there is a source out there saying Marvel is going to see how the first 9 go before making more, but it isn't a reliable source. Sneider tweeted about this as well but doesn't have any extra info to add yet. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I figured this was the case. I'm sure there will be some more concrete reports in the coming months as to when they film the remaining 9 eps (which I know rumors have said would be in November). I agree that they are most likely still happening, though it's definitely something to keep an eye out for more context. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First and second seasons?

[edit]

Currently, this article refers to the episode count as two halves of nine each. However, recently at D23, Kevin Feige has referred to the first 9 episodes as "season one". Should we update this for this article as well as for the info of the series at the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Five article? AxGRvS (talk) 21:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has already been raised above in #Is this really a miniseries? - adamstom97 (talk) 08:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]