Jump to content

Talk:Avengers: Age of Ultron: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{American English}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell |1=
{{ArticleHistory
{{WikiProject Comics|Marvel-work-group=yes|class=start|importance=mid|Film=yes
|action1=PR
}}
|action1date=22:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Film|American-task-force=yes|class=start|importance=|Comic-book-task-force=yes
|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Avengers: Age of Ultron/archive1
}}
|action1result=reviewed
}}
|action1oldid=651517861
{{American English|date=July 2013}}
{{dyktalk|29 July|2013|entry=... that '''''[[The Avengers: Age of Ultron]]''''', the upcoming sequel to the 2012 film ''[[The Avengers (2012 film)|The Avengers]]'', is not based on the comic book series, ''[[Age of Ultron]]''?}}


|action2=GTC
==Copy and paste move==
|action2date=07:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
{{user|Prince of Peas}} copy and pasted this article [[The Avengers 2|into mainspace]], see [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=The_Avengers_2&diff=552756302&oldid=552984651 this diff] -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.76.126|65.94.76.126]] ([[User talk:65.94.76.126|talk]]) 17:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Marvel Cinematic Universe films/archive1
|action2result=promoted
|action2oldid=654982324


|action3=GAN
{{user|Richiekim}} copy and pasted this article [[The Avengers 2|into mainspace]], see [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=561083234&oldid=561082584 this diff] -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.79.6|65.94.79.6]] ([[User talk:65.94.79.6|talk]]) 03:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
|action3date=19:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
|action3link=Talk:Avengers: Age of Ultron/GA1
|action3result=failed
|action3oldid=670227598


|action4=GAN
:{{user|Richiekim}} copy and pasted this talk page [[talk:The Avengers 2|into main talk]], see [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=561084168&oldid=561082588 this diff] -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.79.6|65.94.79.6]] ([[User talk:65.94.79.6|talk]]) 03:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
|action4date=04:15, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
|action4link=Talk:Avengers: Age of Ultron/GA2
|action4result=passed
|action4oldid=686761055


|action5=GTR
== The new Kevin Feige quote ==
|action5date=02:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
|action5link=Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/Marvel Cinematic Universe Films/archive1
|action5result=Demoted


|dykdate=29 July 2013
This just seems like a typical non-answer from someone trying to dodge a question. I don't think it really enhances anyone's understanding of the film's development, or adds anything to the article. It seems to me like it's enough to note that EW reported that the character will be in the film, and then if they happen to be written out of a later draft we can note that then. But I don't think a "maybe, maybe not, things change!" quote really belongs. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 17:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
|dykentry= ... that '''''[[The Avengers: Age of Ultron]]''''', the upcoming sequel to the 2012 film ''[[The Avengers (2012 film)|The Avengers]]'', is not based on the comic book series, ''[[Age of Ultron]]''?
|currentstatus=GA
|topic=media and drama


|action6 = GTC
:I see your point. It is already stated the its a draft, and by definition drafts can change.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 18:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
|action6date = 08:04, 30 April 2024

|action6link = Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Avengers films/archive1
::Okay, I have removed it. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 21:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
|action6result = promoted

|action6oldid = 1219957579
== Quicksilver ==
|ftname = Avengers films

|ftmain = no
Is it worth noting at all that Quicksilver has just been [https://twitter.com/BryanSinger/status/337643722953080832 announced] to appear in ''[[X-Men: Days of Future Past]]''? Only reason I ask is because of the whole character rights situation, as Fox and Marvel Studios can both use the character, but Marvel can only use it without alluding to "mutants". It has been [http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/23/bryan-singer-reveals-quicksilver-is-in-x-men-days-of-future-past mentioned] in sources about the predicament and what it would mean now in regards to ''Avengers 2'' as it will be released after DoFP. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 20:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|1=
:I think so, once we know more about what this means for ''Avengers 2''.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Comics|Marvel=yes|importance=mid|Film=yes}}
::It doesn't mean anything for Avengers, Fox owns the rights to Quicksilver, Marvel owns the rights to Pietro Maximoff, neither can refer to him by the other name. They were saying this back before The Avengers even began production. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 21:25, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Film|American=yes|Comics=yes|mcu=yes|mcu-dyk=yes|mcu-importance=top}}

{{WikiProject Disney|importance=mid}}
:::It's my understanding that they both own the rights to both names, but that they each can only reference certain aspects of the character's history. It is probably worth mentioning, but only when we have reliable sources indicating the specifics of how this influences his role in this film. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 21:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low |USfilm=yes|USfilm-importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Twenty-Tens decade|importance=mid}}
::::[[Wikipedia:There is no deadline|We can wait]] until there is concrete information about how this ''actually'' affects the portrayal of Quicksilver in this movie, because right now we can only [[WP:BALL|speculate]] or [[WP:NOR|surmise]] what they will do. [[User:Spidey104|<font color="blue">'''Spidey'''</font>]][[User talk:Spidey104#top|<font color="red">''104''</font>]] 23:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config
:::::My understanding was similar to Fandraltastic's: that Marvel was allowed to use the character as long as they didn't reference Magneto or that he was a "mutant". That's why I brought it up. But as everyone is saying, we will have to wait until more info is known for ''Avengers 2'' obviously, but if both studios are going to use the character, it will be interesting to see how they approach this so the general public does not get confused. Just wanted to get the situation out there. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 00:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
|archiveheader = {{aan}}

|maxarchivesize = 100K
{{od}} Minor update: [http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=104888 It appears Joss plans to continue on with Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch.]--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 05:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
|minthreadsleft = 4

|minthreadstoarchive = 1
== Saoirse Ronan ==
|counter = 6

|algo = old(30d)
As stated in the sources, this appears only to be rumor at this point. Unfortunately, these types of films are prone to rumor and speculation. Some pick up traction in the press and a few are even addressed by those involved. However, [[WP:CBALL|I do not think it is appropriate to include them]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 06:04, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
|archive = Talk:Avengers: Age of Ultron/Archive %(counter)d

}}
:Agree. If we did include this rumor, then we are essentially saying, let's allow all rumors on to the page. If she is eventually brought on for the role, we can add a bit on how she was widely considered for the part before getting it, if necessary. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 16:18, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
{{Annual report|[[Wikipedia:2015 Top 50 Report|2015]]|17,409,029}}

{{Top 25 Report|Oct 19 2014|Oct 26 2014|Apr 12 2015|until|May 31 2015}}
:: I had placed this information in the article figuring that Ronan's statement regarding the rumors lent some level of credence to them. That was a bit of a fine line and upon consideration, one that should have required more patience on my part for a formal casting announcement. Chalk it up to over-enthusiasm for seeing a favorite character finally appearing in a live action film. ''Mea culpa''. Hopefully by the time of the San Diego Comic-Con International there will be official word on the role. [[User:Mtminchi08|Mtminchi08]] ([[User talk:Mtminchi08|talk]]) 01:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
__TOC__

First, regarding the recent news about Elizabeth Olsen taking over the role, is ''Bleeding Cool'' acceptable as a source? They are citing an anonymous source same as [http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/176783-rumor-what-is-marvels-direction-for-scarlet-witch-a-quicksilver ''Superhero Hype!''] did when they first reported that Saoirse Ronan was Marvel's "prototype" for the character. If so, does this make the ''Superhero Hype!'' article reliable and should it now be included with [http://www.themarysue.com/exclusive-saoirse-ronan-scarlet-witch/ her initial reaction]?--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 12:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:Well, ''The Hollywood Reporter'' is saying that Marvel is in talks with Olsen.[[User:Richiekim|Richiekim]] ([[User talk:Richiekim|talk]]) 19:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
::Very well, but since THR doesn't independently confirm anything about Ronan, we should leave it out for now.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:50, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

== Requested move ==

[[:Wikipedia:Article incubator/The Avengers 2]] → {{no redirect|The Avengers 2}} – Article has reached 25 references [[User:Richiekim|Richiekim]] ([[User talk:Richiekim|talk]]) 17:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

'''Comment:''' There is no 25 reference rule just something we used in the past but I'm beginning to think we can afford to wait for more considering the media attention this film is getting and the fact that we're still a year away from when filming is scheduled to begin. Although the media attention might make it more notable now, it just seems 25 references isn't what it used to be for these types of film. I don't know.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
:There's also no evidence that The Avengers 2 is the name of the film, given the rest of the films that are subtitled it seems unlikely. If anything it would be moved to United The Avengers Sequel. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 21:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
::The [[WP:COMMONNAME]] does seem to be ''The Avengers 2''. The press release from Marvel about RDJ's casting indicates that the official name is ''Marvel's The Avengers 2'', although that could change.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
:::The Wikipedia page for ''[[Thor: The Dark World]]'' was originally titled ''Thor 2'' before Marvel officially announced the title of the film, so ''The Avengers 2'' would be an acceptable title, as that's what the majority of the press are referring to it as, even though I believe it's likely that Marvel will add a subtitle to the film. [[User:Richiekim|Richiekim]] ([[User talk:Richiekim|talk]]) 22:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
::::I think we should wait a little bit longer as well, as I'm sure it will start gain some more media traction. As for the name, I think ''The Avengers 2'' will be fine for the moment, but I do think it will have a subtitle, as in ''Marvel's The Avengers: (something)''. I think Feige even stated somewhere that he would be "surprised" if it didn't, and he was a fan of how ''Star Wars'' has labeled their films. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 23:49, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
*'''Cautious support'''; if there's a lot of references I think we're alright. Titles can be moved. I think we have enough to go on for an article. [[User:Red Slash|<font color="#FF4131">Red </font>]][[User talk:Red Slash|<b><font color="#460121">Slash</font></b>]] 18:14, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
*'''Procedural close'''. [[WP:RM]] is not for evaluating incubator status. [[User:Apteva|Apteva]] ([[User talk:Apteva|talk]]) 21:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
::Maybe so but copy-paste moves are never the answer. In the future, if consensus is that the article is ready, please request a [[WP:RM/TR|technical move]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:19, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
{{outdent}}
With the recent announcement of the full title and the villain for the film it is getting ''"more media traction."'' More [[Wikipedia:Readers first|people]] are going to be looking for information on this film now, and I think a lot of people are going to try creating articles for it if they don't find one. So I think it should be moved to full article now. [[User:Spidey104|<font color="blue">'''Spidey'''</font>]][[User talk:Spidey104#top|<font color="red">''104''</font>]] 17:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support:''' I would be in support of a move to the article space, if only to quell any errant attempts at creating the article. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:44, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' We already have our first attempt, copy and paste move by an IP, [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=The_Avengers%3A_Age_of_Ultron&diff=565199014&oldid=565133049 here]. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 18:37, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
::I wonder if we should just [[WP:BEBOLD]], and then deal with its merits.[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:04, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I think so too. I don't really see any fall back from it. We will only just be adding info here, so why not be doing it in the article space? - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 19:47, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:::Also name is ''Marvel's The Avengers: Age of Ultron''. [http://marvel.com/news/story/20910/sdcc_2013_joss_whedon_reveals_avengers_age_of_ultron Source]. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 19:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
::::We can try requesting a [[WP:RM/TR|technical move]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 20:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::Can we not just use the drop down arrow, select "Move", then in the selection to where to move it, select "Article" and put the name (as where we want to move is just a redirect)? Won't that move the page history and talk page with it? - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 21:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::You can try but it might not work because of the redirect.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Will give it a shot right now to see. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Didn't work. Got "You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reason: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text." I can submit a request to be moved. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully we are in business: [[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests#movereq-Wikipedia:Article Incubator/The Avengers: Age of Ultron]] - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:19, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

== Non-appearing cast ==

Joss Whedon [http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=106835 recently stated] that Coulson will not be in this film. I already added this information to the [[Phil Coulson]] article, but I wasn't sure if I should add this information to the "Cast" section of this article or not. It is news about this film, but it's news of something not happening. It's not a black-or-white include or not-include situation. What do you think? [[User:Spidey104|<font color="blue">'''Spidey'''</font>]][[User talk:Spidey104#top|<font color="red">''104''</font>]] 20:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

:A non-appearance is not notable unless he/she was previously scheduled to appear.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 20:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit request on 23 July 2013 ==
{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
There is no "the" in the title of the film. It is simply titled, "Avengers: Age of Ultron".

The logo:
http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/avengers-age-of-ultron-logo-slice.jpg
<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/24.121.188.207|24.121.188.207]] ([[User talk:24.121.188.207|talk]]) 20:50, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

{{Not done}}, the full title is ''Marvel's The Avengers: Age of Ultron'' per [http://marvel.com/news/story/20910/sdcc_2013_joss_whedon_reveals_avengers_age_of_ultron source from Marvel].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 21:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

:This brings up a question I have wondered for a while: if the full title is ''Marvel's The Avengers: Age of Ultron'' why is the article's title only "The Avengers: Age of Ultron" (and why is the article for ''Marvel's The Avengers'' only "[[The Avengers (2012 film)|The Avengers]]")? [[User:Spidey104|<font color="blue">'''Spidey'''</font>]][[User talk:Spidey104#top|<font color="red">''104''</font>]] 00:39, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

::Because the [[WP:COMMONNAME]] is "The Avengers: Age of Ultron", we do not use [[WP:OFFICIALNAME|official name]] unless it is also the common name (ex. ''[[Dr. Strangelove]]'' not ''Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb'').--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 00:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

You know, in all the new press releases I've noticed the title is always just "Avengers: Age of Ultron". No "The" and no "Marvel's". Look at the [http://marvel.com/news/story/21099/exclusive_avengers_age_of_ultron_casts_james_spader_as_the_films_legendary_villain James Spader press release] and how the first film is always listed as "Marvel's The Avengers" while the new one is always just "Avengers: Age of Ultron". If it does say Marvel's it's always outside the quote marks, unlike the first film which always has it inside the marks. Same with the new [http://marvel.com/news/story/21107/official_bradley_cooper_to_voice_rocket_raccoon_in_marvels_guardians_of_the_galaxy Bradley Cooper press release]. At the bottom you can see it's only "Avengers: Age of Ultron". There's also of course the [https:/upwiki/wikipedia/en/7/71/Avengers_Age_of_Ultron_logo.jpg official logo] that doesn't have the "The" and the [http://marvel.com/movies/movie/193/avengers_age_of_ultron official Marvel page] which has no "The" either. The ''only'' time I've seen the title given as "Marvel's The Avengers: Age of Ultron" is in the [http://marvel.com/news/story/20910/sdcc_2013_joss_whedon_reveals_avengers_age_of_ultron original press release] announcing the title (although even the title of that article gives it without the "The"), but all the ones after that are different. I really think we need to change it to what the more recent ones show. No "Marvel's" and definitely no "The". --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 05:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
:Hmm. Definitely something to look into. I wouldn't be too rash at the moment, as we will still be getting more press info officially from Marvel. I would say look to third party sources, but their stylings are all different across the board, so they aren't much help. I do see what you are saying, and we can definitely change if needed, but I'm still inclined to err towards the official announcement release for the name. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 15:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
::Yeah, I almost made this an actual request move (still might eventually). It just seems to me "Avengers: Age of Ultron" is by far the common name, at least when it comes to official sources, and that the guy who wrote that first announcement probably just screwed up since it's the only time it's ever been done that way. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 17:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
:::I don't think it was a screw up, because to me, it seems that they are just shortening it. Again, let's just wait to see what else Marvel gives us, and (cautiously) third party sources. We still have less than two years until this releases. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 18:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
::::They're just shortening it even when they go out of their way to refer to the first film by its full name every single time? No, I'm not buying it. That James Spader press release and the different ways they wrote the two films' titles pretty much settled it for me. I can wait, but how many more does it really take to prove that that's just the title and not a "shortening"? They've consistently not used a "The" outside of that one source. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 19:10, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

== "commonly called ''The Avengers 2''" ==

Is this really necessary in the lead? It has a title now, so there is no need to refer to it by the provisional "''The Avengers 2''" any longer. --[[User:Robsinden|Rob Sinden]] ([[User talk:Robsinden|talk]]) 12:52, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

:Yes, it has a title but people still call it ''The Avengers 2'', and is still referred to as such by reliable sources for simplicity sake or just to identify with general audiences. Whatever the case maybe, it used enough to warrant inclusion to put [[WP:readers first|readers first]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 12:57, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
::But the numerical was used purely as a placeholder until the title was revealed. We have a redirect from [[The Avengers 2]] to satisfy the reader and the lead mentions that it's a sequel to ''The Avengers''. Including it in the lead is redundant and looks unprofessional. We don't include provisional working titles for other films once titles are known. --[[User:Robsinden|Rob Sinden]] ([[User talk:Robsinden|talk]]) 13:04, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

:::Its more than just a working title, its an everyday title. We use them so when a reliable author or someone affiliated with the film uses the term, readers now what they're talking about. Example: the title for ''[[Thor: The Dark World]]'' was announced over a year ago but sources less than 24-hours ago still call it ''[http://www.etonline.com/movies/136390_Zachary_Levi_Talks_Thor_2_Nerd_HQ_at_Comic_Con/index.html Thor 2]''.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Well, it should be removed from Thor's lead too. Completely unneccesary. --[[User:Robsinden|Rob Sinden]] ([[User talk:Robsinden|talk]]) 13:24, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

:::::Again, [[WP:readers first|readers first]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, per what's being talked about here, and in the discussion above with Spidey, it should most likely add (commonly called ''The Avengers 2'' or ''The Avengers: Age of Ultron''). - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

:The discussion has been moved to [[WT:FILM#The Avengers 2, Thor 2, Captain America 2, etc., in article lead]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 17:33, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
::Yes just saw that. Agree with the redirect templates. But should something be stated, like on The Avengers page, that says (or simply ''The Avengers: Age of Ultron'')? Because without the Marvel's would be a more common name when referenced to. (And I'm sure the media will find another way to reference it, such as Avengers: AoU etc.) - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:46, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm fine with or "simply ''The Avengers: Age of Ultron''".--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 17:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Great. Done. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 19:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Hatnote ==

While I can see that it is reasonable to believe someone searching for ''The Avengers: Age of Ultron'', might type ''[[Age of Ultron]]''. I do not think someone looking for the comic book, will type ''The Avengers: Age of Ultron''. So is the hatnote on this page necessary?--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 20:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
:Hmm. I see your point. You are correct that most people searching for this film, may just quickly type Age of Ultron. Also, by having it here, as it is right on top, people may think the film and comic storylines are similar. I believe I added it when the subtitle was first announced, as a precaution, but now that they are known to be separate storylines, it may not really have a purpose here. But definitely on the ''Age of Ultron'' page. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 20:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Advertisement ==

Surely an article about a picture which hasn't even been made yet can only be an advertisement?

[[User:Baska436|Baska436]] ([[User talk:Baska436|talk]]) 11:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

:Surely, you can be mistaken.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 11:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
:I haven't attended a [[ComicCon]] since the 90's, but I'd be willing to bet there's several thousand people at that one show who'd disagree with you. --[[User:Scalhotrod|Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy...]] ([[User talk:Scalhotrod|talk]]) 17:09, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

== Evans ==

[http://www.deadline.com/2013/08/chris-evans-to-helm-130-train-before-reprising-captain-america-in-avengers-2/ Here] is confirmation that Evans will be back. I'm a bit strapped for time so if someone else could add it to the article (and other relevant articles) that would be great. Cheers -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 22:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
:It doesn't even say "Evans confirms he will be back". The main focus is his directorial debut. I feel until he or the makers confirm he is indeed in it, he shouldn't be placed in. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 00:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::This is a very reliable source stating that he will return, and laying out the schedule for his return. Whether or not it comes from his mouth is irrelevant. This is how all film articles have always been handled. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 00:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:::It's a poor way to do so. It does not say his return is confirmed. The word confirmed is not present, therefore, it's speculative. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 00:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::The word confirmed would be superfluous here, the statement is their confirmation. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 01:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::No source has to use the word "confirm", to be considered verifiable. However the information does seem to be based on hearsay due to use of the phrase "I hear". So the questions becomes does the hearsay of reliable source such as ''Deadline'' count?--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 01:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::I believe that is simply Fleming's "informal" style of writing, as he starts many of his articles like that (Ex. [http://www.deadline.com/2013/02/chris-pratt-getting-guardians-of-the-galaxy-lead/ 1] [http://www.deadline.com/2013/02/revenges-emily-vancamp-lands-lead-in-captain-america-2/ 2]). We use his articles fairly often across the film project. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 01:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::As far as we could know, This is what Fleming is saying. It might not be what Evans, or Whedon or Feige are saying. Get what I'm saying? [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 03:27 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::Evans, Whedon or Feige don't have to say anything. Per [[WP:V]], all that matters is the information comes from a reliable source. ''Deadline'' is a reliable source. To me the questions boils down to: Based on the author's language, is the information sufficient for inclusion? Or as [[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] suggested just reflective of the author's colloquial tone.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 12:45, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::The headline of Fleming's article unambiguously says Evans is reprising his role in Avengers 2. It doesn't have a rumor or report disclaimer or anything like that. [[User:Richiekim|Richiekim]] ([[User talk:Richiekim|talk]]) 12:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Again, still doesn't mean this is confirmed. All it says is that he's making his directing debut before picking up the shield. There's is not one mention he is confirmed. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 13:32 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::Why are you stuck on the word "confirm"? Flemming made a definitive statement; "I’ve heard Evans plans to direct the movie this fall, completing production before he picks up his shield to play Captain America in The Avengers: Age Of Ultron." In other words; Before Chris Evans picks up his shield to play Captain America in The Avengers: Age Of Ultron, he plans to direct the movie.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:40, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::Again, what matters is why did Flemming choose to prequalify his statement with "I've heard" as if to remove any responsibility for making it. Yes, it could be just his writing style but who knows or he could be saying that the information comes from an unofficial source. Though if the information does come from an unofficial source, it must be trusted enough for him to report it or he would be jeopardizing his journalistic integrating.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Reading it, the "I've heard" part seems to be related to the mention of directing the film rather than about him taking part in Avengers. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 22:09, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Agree. It reads that Fleming has heard that Evans will direct this film, before appearing in Avengers: AoU, as he previously had not plans for a project before hand. That's how I read it, and think on Fleming meant it. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Is there anything else to add to this discussion? It seems consensus is to include the info. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 19:12, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
:Not by me. Upon closer look I agree with [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]], the wording does seem to be more related to ''1:30 Train''.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
::We could just wait until the D23 expo happens. I'd be surprised if they didn't announce a few things there. --[[User:ProfessorKilroy|ProfessorKilroy]] ([[User talk:ProfessorKilroy|talk]]) 22:29, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
:::True, but we also are wording it correctly by saying "In August 2013, Deadline reported..." - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 00:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::It has been a week since this discussion started. If nobody has anything of substance to add then there is no need to prolong it any further.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== Archiving sources ==

I just wanted to say that we all seem to be doing a good job formatting our references. However please try to archive your sources as well. I know [[WebCite]] is going through some hardships (donate if you can) but until they go away, it is still a valuable resource in preventing [[WP:LINKROT|linkrot]]. Its not difficult and only takes a minute. Just go to [http://www.webcitation.org/ webcitation.org] and click "Archive" at the top of the page, enter the url of the source, your email address and hit "Submit". Its that easy. Thank you.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]])

== Returning cast members ==

Just wondering. Do we consider it necessary to note every time an actor from the first film's return is confirmed in the pre-production section? It's good to have those references and wait until that confirmation before adding them to the cast section of the page. But these confirmations don't appear to be notable aspects of the film's pre-production process, as they come in somewhat arbitrarily. Mark Ruffalo tweeting that he'd be back in March 2013 and Deadline confirming that Evans would be back in an article about a different film seem irrelevant to this film's production. It's not as though those actors signed new contracts around those dates or that their commitment to the film changed on those dates. And we're bound to have another half-dozen or so of these types of "confirmations". It seems to me that including those actors in the cast section with those references is enough.

Downey would be the exception, since he actually did sign a new contract and whether or not he would return was a topic of interest covered by a variety of reliable sources. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 03:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

:I think so. This film is its own animal. So we should know when each of its participants came aboard, at least publicly.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 12:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

:Fiege and Whedon have been talking about the return of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye.
http://screenrant.com/avengers-2-age-of-ultron-hawkeye/ <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.188.24.247|71.188.24.247]] ([[User talk:71.188.24.247|talk]]) 19:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::Whedon did not mention Renner, only Hawkeye.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 20:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

{{od}} On second thought, I don't it is notable to simply include a report in the production section that we determine is reliable. After all, they could have been cast months earlier. We should only include the report if it pinpoints the timeframe when the actors were brought onboard or makes an official announcement from the studio, actor or filmmaker.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 13:19, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

== Scarlett Johansson ==

The source for Scarlett Johansson is not reliable. It just assumes that she will be back, it never contains any information saying that she will definitely be in it. This article obviously just assumes that all cast from the first film will return for the second. A better source is needed before she can be added to the cast list, otherwise it should just remain in prose that MTV claimed she would return, but that it remains unconfirmed. [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 22:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
:It's a report. If she isn't returning, they wouldn't say "Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow". Chris Evans source is something I question ,yet it remains. For now, let's just leave Evans and Johansson be, as more sources will definetly be on the way. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 01:43, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
::The difference is ''THR'' was doing there own reporting on Evans and could easily find out additional information, whereas ''MTV'' was merely covering a published story and wouldn't be privy to new information not published in the original.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 02:42, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Plus since on Deadline or Collider (not sure which, but I've definitely seen it) there has been a video interview with Evans where he confirms that he is returning, but this MTV article for Scarlett Johansson is mainly about Scarlet Witch, and, as I have mentioned previously, they are just assuming that all the cast are returning, hence putting Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow, it never actually gives proper confirmation she has signed on. [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 03:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
{{od}} With the recent additions of Hemsworth and Taylor, it seems some sources are playing fast and loose with their information. We should scrutinize these more before adding them to the article. It would seem, especially in the case of Taylor, that the trades would pick this up not a passing mention on a music website.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 04:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
:Agree. This Contact Music source, is one I don't believe to be one to "confirm" the inclusion, only using their assumptions that the same actors will return. It's all in their wording. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 12:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
::Can we go ahead and remove Scarlett Johansson from this and the MCU page then, until we get a more reliable source, as it just assumes that she is returning the same way the contact music source assumes all the cast is returning. [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 22:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
:::I am fine with this, if others are. I agree with you Frog (and Triiiple), that it seems many news sites are just jumping on the fact that since it is mentioned that Black Widow is back, so is Johansson, as well as all the previous characters in the last film. As such, I believe that would be [[WP:SYNTH|synthesizing]] on their part? - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 23:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I have already removed Johansson.[[User:Richiekim|Richiekim]] ([[User talk:Richiekim|talk]]) 14:35, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::In this video, Evans confirms he begins shooting A:AOU in March 2014, confirming he has signed on, so can we re-add him to the cast list now? http://collider.com/chris-evans-captain-america-2-sequel-interview/ [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 18:36, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::{{done}}--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 18:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

== Hemsworth Source ==

As of writing this, the source provided for Hemsworth's involvement is an article from [http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=38530 Empire Online] about Elizabeth Olsen's potential involvement. I don't think the source is confirming Hemsworth is involved, they just listed the actors that portrayed the Avengers. If no one can find a better source, I'm taking it off the page.<br>[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 17:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
:It's getting increasing difficult to enhance the article if every source discussing returning Avengers is immediately thrown out. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 17:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
::I believe one has been added, the USA Today source. If not, the IGN article on Spader confirms it. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
:::I know, but this is the fifth time that Johansson has been removed from the list. It's rather annoying if we must wait for a statement from Johansson herself. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 17:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
::::But it is all speculation so far by news outlets. [[WP:NORUSH|We can wait]]. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::[http://variety.com/2013/film/news/james-spader-avengers-sequel-ultron-1200591905/ Variety] confirms Hemsworth will be back in their Spader story, that's probably a stronger source than IGN. -[[User:Fandraltastic|Fandraltastic]] ([[User talk:Fandraltastic|talk]]) 18:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::If you actually read the source that IGN has got it's information from, as cited in the article, http://marvel.com/news/story/21099/exclusive_avengers_age_of_ultron_casts_james_spader_as_the_films_legendary_villain it doesn't mention anything about Hemsworth, and the Variety article still doesn't have any evidence to back up their claims, it is just new site assumption that the leads will all reprise their roles. [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 19:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::I believe that IGN and Variety are both using something else from Marvel for their confirmation, because the IGN source states: "Marvel Studios made the announcement today, adding that Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth will also reprise their roles as Captain America and Thor, respectively, for the sequel." The key is the "adding" immediately after the link of "Marvel Studios made the announcement today" which takes you to the press release, as it means that this info is coming from Marvel themselves. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
{{od}}Wait, is IGN actually considered a reputable source? The Variety article is the only one that seems to work, but that they are the only one that seems to make any mention of Hemsworth returning might indicate an error on their part. I like the [[WP:NORUSH|wait]] idea.<br>Also, regarding Rusted AutoParts' initial objection, the issue wasn't the article, but the interpretation of the article. Saying Olsen has the acting chops to hang with someone like Hemsworth is not a confirmation that Hemsworth is in the movie. It's that difficult to expand the article because the page was created significantly early for a film. Again, wait.<br>[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 06:07, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
:IGN is a perfectly reputable source. And whenever info is not confirmed, or still rumor, they have stated as such. As this is not here, I believe it to be fine. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 15:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
::But am I the only one that finds it suspect that Hemsworth's involvement in the film, especially given that he's one of the main characters, would be "confirmed" by being buried at the end of a story that has nothing to do with him? Also taking into consideration that Marvel released a press statement as recent as yesterday that makes no mention whatsoever of Hemsworth returning for ''Avengers 2''.
::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 15:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
:::I agree, I find it strange, especially as there have been reports that Hemsworth was in two minds about signing up, that Marvel wouldn't unveil it in a press release, or at least a joint one for Chris Evans too, seen as they are the leads, instead of just having it as a small add on of the casting of the villain. [[User:Frogkermit|Frogkermit]] ([[User talk:Frogkermit|talk]]) 23:49, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
::::Frog, it seems it's just you and Waffle that have the issue with this. I mean, a source says that they're returning, you immediately question it and remove it. Are you expecting some sort of formal confirmation from Hemsworth or Johansson? Also, they're under contract. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 00:46, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::I understand both of your concerns Frog and Waffle, but the wording is acceptable and usable in this case. It is not like previously, where news outlets were using synthesis on their parts, saying actors would return. As far as I know, all signings/confirmations are not always done through a press release like Spader got. Most of the time, it is how it was presented in the IGN or Variety source. To Rusted, they may be under contract, but that does not necessarily mean they will return in this film. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 01:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
{{od}}I don't understand what you mean by "synthesis" here, but, if these sources do in fact confirm Hemsworth's involvement, it would be entirely different from the confirmation of every other actor that's appeared in a recent Marvel movie. While not all come from press statements Marvel releases to the public to their audience, it comes through a press release given to a source like ''Deadline'' or ''THR'' that then writes the article about the actor's involvement. Marvel confirming an actor's involvement in a film by just including his name at the very bottom of an article or press release that has nothing to do with that actor is so far unheard of.<br>Also, to answer RAP's question, yes, I am expecting some formal confirmation of Hemsworth, Johansson, and every other actor that is involved in this film. It's the standard we've come to expect.<br>[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 22:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:Well, IGN is a reliable source, so it's safe to say that we have a valid source, not some small time news agency. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 22:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::I still find it odd that IGN is considered a valid source since their name is associated with shaky journalistic integrity, but the issue is not that IGN said it, it's that the usual players in this have not.
::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 23:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Here's the thing. The news article is specifically about Spader. And they also mentioned the returning actors that have already been confirmed. Downey, Evans, Ruffalo and Jackson. Hemsworth was in that group too, with Johansson and Renner still unmentioned (I'm certain Johansson is confirmed, but there isn't a source everyone trusts yet). So with that said, it seems Hemsworth is in as of now. And the verdict is still out on Renner. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 23:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::::Here's the thing. The news article is about Spader, not Hemsworth, so Hemsworth's involvement being confirmed in an article about Spader is highly irregular. This is especially so when the sources talking about Hemsworth's involvement are not only few but not among the sources that typically confirm such things. What's more likely - IGN is privy to information a source like Deadline isn't and Marvel has not yet made public, or IGN, assuming as we all do that the entire cast will return, listed Hemsworth with other actors confirmed to return without double checking their sources? I'm inclined to believe the latter.
::::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 23:35, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:So basically, you believe news sites aren't allowed to state whether or not an actor is returning? [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 23:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
::No, I believe what news sources report on needs to be held under some scrutiny. Especially when one news source says something that isn't being reported on much anywhere else. Especially when that one news source is IGN.
::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 23:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Numerous sources stated Johansson was confirmed to return, yet they were removed, if so many websites were stating a false positive, then they all lose their credibility, something I consider a drastic thought. [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 00:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
::::If that's what you keep reading, I think the issue isn't with the sources but how you read them.
::::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 00:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::No, it's what you feel is more trusting. If IGN or Variety aren't reliable, than what is? [[User:Rusted AutoParts|<font face="Rockwell" size="3" style="color:#000000;color:red"><i>Rusted AutoParts</i></font>]] 01:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::Well, definitely not IGN. But reading a source wrong has no bearing on how reliable it is. Regardless, [http://www.eonline.com/news/456925/chris-hemsworth-talks-awkward-naked-movie-scenes-snow-white-sequel-with-kristen-stewart this] interview Hemworth gave with E! settles the issue.
::::::[[User:LoveWaffle|LoveWaffle]] ([[User talk:LoveWaffle|talk]]) 18:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, the E! source does settle it, but I don't know where you are believing IGN is unreliable. They are perfectly reliable for news information, especially for info used in pages like this. And if they report on a rumor, they state that. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 19:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

== The Avengers 2 redirects here. ==

...is completely useless. Why is it even there? No other sequel titled differently has that. '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 18:48, 14 September 2013 (UTC)


== Out of date references ==
:It's there per consensus, see [[#"commonly called The Avengers 2"|above]].--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:03, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
::I gotta agree with Taylor, where else would The Avengers 2 be redirecting? If I type in Isidious 2 I expect to be taken to Insidious Chapter 2, I just can't be bothered typing the whole thing out. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 19:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Thats because you are aware of what you are looking for. If there are published articles that only refer to the film as The Avengers 2, an uninformed reader might not be aware that The Avengers: Age of Ultron is the same film. Sidenote: the project page discussion has been archived.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:11, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
::::They might not be aware of it... but the hatnote is still not serving a purpose. It doesn't distinguish anything. Your argument that "they might not know The Avengers Age of Ultron is the same film" doesn't make sense, because the hatnote is totally unrelated to that. It's just telling you that something redirects here - not that "The Avengers 2" is the same as "The Avengers: Age of Ultron." '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 19:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::A bit of a history; that information was in the article lead but editors came to a concensus that it would be better served as a hatnote.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 19:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::Well, let's get new consensus, shall we? '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 19:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)


There are mentions to Captain Marvel being scheduled to have her own movie in 2019. Someone who can make changes should have a quick read through if it's to remain semi-protected. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.67.134.81|76.67.134.81]] ([[User talk:76.67.134.81#top|talk]]) </small>
The redirect template should stay, or ''The Avengers 2'' should be added back to the lead, either one. It should stay because it was known since the reveal of the sequel as ''The Avengers 2'', as well as official stated by Marvel when Downey resigned. Only at Comic-Con did the title change to its official one, but published articles had been referencing it as ''Avengers 2'' until then. So, as TriiipleThreat stated, an uninformed reader comes here to search "The Avengers 2" and gets taken to this page, would not know they are the same. And we can't assume they'd stay on the page long enough to see in the second sentence of the lead, "intended sequel to ''The Avengers''", because even then, possibly knowing that Downy will be in ''Avengers 3'', they could think this page is for that film, as ''The Avengers 2'' is not used anywhere in the article. [[WP:RF]] - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 23:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
:The very fact that "The Avengers 2" takes them here should be a pretty big red flag that they've found the right article. So I gotta agree that it serves no purpose in the hatnote. Nor do I think it should be in the lead or anywhere else in the article except for direct quotes where it's more than likely being used informally. The makers of the film made a choice not to have "2" be in the official title and we should respect that. That goes for all the Marvel sequel articles doing this. I can't think of any other sequel articles on Wikipedia that does this kind of thing. That's because we flat out say it's the sequel in the lead. People aren't stupid, they'll figure it out. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 23:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
::Its not just for readers who came here through the redirect but for readers that are already here yet the when they check the source theres no evidence of 'Age of Ultron'. Also we are respecting the filmmakers but also the common vernacular where it is still very much being used. Sequel could be any film in a series of film so we should be specific, we shouldn't make any assumptions on behalf of the readers. While those familiar with the film might know what we are talking about, those unfamiliar may not.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 23:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Then just change where it says sequel to "second film" or something. "The Avengers 2" is wrong and not necessary. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 23:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
::::It's not wrong, it's colloquial.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 23:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::Which means it has no place in the lead. Otherwise why not list informal alternate titles for every film --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 23:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::I disagree, it's used enough in the media and in everyday language to the point it deserves a mention in the lead.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 23:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::::People call ''[[Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones]]'' [[Star Wars 2]] pretty often and there's no hatnote. I think people would use common sense. '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 23:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::::After a quick google news search, I dont see that it is being used to the same extent.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 00:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::::Actually there is a hatnote on that page, but that's because there's possible confusion there. There isn't here. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 00:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::There is a hatnote there. But it's not just stating the obvious - it serves a purpose. '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 00:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::I agree. I strongly believe that alternate informal titles belong as redirects only. Plenty of people called ''[[Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest]]'' "Pirates 2", I even remember TV spots where the voice over guy actually called it that, but it's not in that article's lead. It doesn't need to be. Look at the references on the ''[[Star Trek Into Darkness]]'' article and see how often "Star Trek 2" shows up, but it's not in the lead there either. If for whatever reason we do decide to put "The Avengers 2" in the lead on this article it needs to be made clear it's an informal title only and in no way official, no matter how "common" it is. But it definitely doesn't belong as a hatnote if there's no other article to confuse it with. (For example the one at ''[[Captain America: The Winter Soldier]]'' is absolutely fine. It has a purpose because there's another movie actually called "Captain America II".) --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 00:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
{{od}} For the record: I'd prefer it in the lead over a hatenote and there's plenty of was to distinguish it from official title, such as 'commonly called' or 'colloquially called', etc.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 00:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:"Commonly called" isn't very good since it doesn't distinguish it as informal. "Colloquially called" is a bit better, but I still don't like it. Maybe "sometimes colloquially called". Ideally however we could just make it clear in the lead that it's the second film in the series without calling it "The Avengers 2". Everybody knows that all the colloquial title means anyway. And once full on promotion with the official title starts it really won't be needed. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 01:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:*How about "also known as"? But I think adding it anywhere would be useless. It says right there that it's the intended sequel to the first Avengers. '''''[[User:Taylor Trescott|<span style="color:#B6B3FF; font-family: Courier">Taylor Trescott</span>]]''''' - <sup>[[User talk:Taylor Trescott|my talk]]</sup> + <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Taylor Trescott|my edits]]</sub> 01:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::No, "also known as" makes it sound somehow official. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 01:31, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Agreed, 'known as' could be construed as a title, 'called' is a sobriquet. Also a sequel can be any film in a series, it's not specific enough besides the point is to directly match readers with what is stated in publications.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 01:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::That's why I said clarify. I would agree that right now simply calling it a sequel in the article is not clear. And that's all someone using "The Avengers 2" colloquially means anyway. That it's the second Avengers. I don't see the need to make it match exactly with publications who are also just using it in that sense. Readers understand that. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 01:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::I guess I could settle for "It is intended to be the second ''Avengers'' film following 2012's ''Marvel's The Avengers'' and the eleventh installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 02:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::I like that. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 02:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


== Footnote 31 ==
Okay, so what now of ''Thor: The Dark World'', because that had the hatnote as well. And has since been readded to the lead. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 02:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:I would like to see it (and any other relevant Marvel titles) edited to match this one. I was personally waiting to see if anyone would contest this change before doing it. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 03:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::Well that is a little different than this and ''CapTWS''. This franchise has had a third film announced for it, while, as you mentioned, there is actually a Cap II film which could be confusing. I don't even think we have to include the ''Thor 2'' part because no other media has this name, and seeing "sequel to 2011's ''Thor''" won't throw anyone off because no other sequels, for now, have been announced. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 03:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:::The Cap situation is indeed tricky. We can't exactly say it's "the second ''Captain America'' film", but maybe we could say "the second Marvel Studios ''Captain America'' film" instead. Though I'm not sure any edit is really needed at the moment. On the Iron Man articles I would see it as a chance to link to the [[Iron Man in film]] article. For example on the Iron Man 3 article it could be changed to "It is the third [[Iron Man in film|''Iron Man'' film]] following 2008's ''[[Iron Man (2008 film)|Iron Man]]'' and 2010's ''[[Iron Man 2]]'', and the seventh installment in the [[Marvel Cinematic Universe]]". I suppose we could do something similar on the Cap article and link to [[Captain America in film#Marvel Cinematic Universe]]. And with Thor I don't really see the difference with this article. We would be replacing the "commonly called ''Thor 2''" bit with "second ''Thor'' film". --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 04:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::The only other article that could be changed is [[Thor: The Dark World]], it's not needed anywhere else. The hatenote at CTW is sufficient and the titles of the Iron Man films are straight forward.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 05:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:::::It's possible I'm over thinking it. --[[User:DocNox|DocNox]] ([[User talk:DocNox|talk]]) 05:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, I was going to say what Triiiple did. I think ThorTDW is the only one to examine to change. Should we move this discussion to that talk page? - 05:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


The link to entertainment weekly is broken. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/07/18/avengers-age-of-ultron-scarlett-johanssons-pregnancy/ [[User:Actionmoviefreak|Actionmoviefreak]] ([[User talk:Actionmoviefreak|talk]]) 20:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
== Spader ==


:Fixed [[User:Indagate|Indagate]] ([[User talk:Indagate|talk]]) 21:16, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
[http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/10/01/the-avengers-2-james-spader-talks-ultron Here] are some quotes from Spader. Adding here, because the first set is interesting. Is him talking about the photos and scans and indication that he may actually be ''in'' Ultron (albeit, probably how Downey is in partially built suits for Iron Man)? - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 04:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


== Ultron MCU Wikipedia page ==
== Please remove Aaron-Taylor Johnson's casting addition ==


Shall we create Wikipedia page for Ultron MCU character since he was the main antagonist in Avengers 2 and also made appearances in What if series [[User:Ashokkumar047|Ashokkumar047]] ([[User talk:Ashokkumar047|talk]]) 12:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
He was not OFFICIALLY announced by anyone at Marvel/The Avengers Cast. He is still in talks to play Quicksilver and is not officially signed on to play him,


:Draft at [[Draft:Ultron (Marvel Cinematic Universe)]], but does not satisfy [[WP:MCUCHARACTERS]] [[User:Indagate|Indagate]] ([[User talk:Indagate|talk]]) 12:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
This is not a source, and the dude who wrote the article is only referencing back to his talks with various websites about the character. not an official announcement.


==Nearly $500 million budget?==
Link: http://latino-review.com/2013/10/exclusive-its-official-aaron-johnson-cast-as-quicksilver-in-avengers-age-of-ultron/
I know a source is cited but if the film had a budget of $495 million in 2015 (or about $641 million converted to 2023) that would make it the most expensive movie ever made. Is this number verified by multiple sources? It's a top-of-mind issue with talk of recent Disney films being too expensive with budgets in the 250-300 range, and that's in today's dollars. Compared to the number given for Ultron (and a similarly high figure of Thor: Dark World) the new movies look like bargain basement. [[Special:Contributions/136.159.160.122|136.159.160.122]] ([[User talk:136.159.160.122|talk]]) 20:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:54, 10 July 2024

Good articleAvengers: Age of Ultron has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starAvengers: Age of Ultron is part of the Avengers films series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 15, 2015Peer reviewReviewed
April 5, 2015Good topic candidatePromoted
July 6, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
October 21, 2015Good article nomineeListed
November 18, 2019Good topic removal candidateDemoted
April 30, 2024Good topic candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 29, 2013.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that The Avengers: Age of Ultron, the upcoming sequel to the 2012 film The Avengers, is not based on the comic book series, Age of Ultron?
Current status: Good article

Out of date references

[edit]

There are mentions to Captain Marvel being scheduled to have her own movie in 2019. Someone who can make changes should have a quick read through if it's to remain semi-protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.134.81 (talk)

Footnote 31

[edit]

The link to entertainment weekly is broken. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/07/18/avengers-age-of-ultron-scarlett-johanssons-pregnancy/ Actionmoviefreak (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Indagate (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ultron MCU Wikipedia page

[edit]

Shall we create Wikipedia page for Ultron MCU character since he was the main antagonist in Avengers 2 and also made appearances in What if series Ashokkumar047 (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft at Draft:Ultron (Marvel Cinematic Universe), but does not satisfy WP:MCUCHARACTERS Indagate (talk) 12:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly $500 million budget?

[edit]

I know a source is cited but if the film had a budget of $495 million in 2015 (or about $641 million converted to 2023) that would make it the most expensive movie ever made. Is this number verified by multiple sources? It's a top-of-mind issue with talk of recent Disney films being too expensive with budgets in the 250-300 range, and that's in today's dollars. Compared to the number given for Ultron (and a similarly high figure of Thor: Dark World) the new movies look like bargain basement. 136.159.160.122 (talk) 20:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Avengers:_Age_of_Ultron&oldid=1233679067"