User talk:Adamstom.97

Untitled Avengers film

Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.

BTW: There's nothing in the (released, cinematic version of) the previous film that "made very clear" that Spider-Man is an Avenger: he joins his mentor Stark (technically an Avenger, but next-to-no mention of that is made in the film, either), Doctor Strange (not an Avenger) and the Guardians (not Avengers) in outer space and on Titan while the Avengers are fighting other mooks back on earth. And if you think the main content of the HR article does not merit mention anywhere in our article, you should say so; if you think it should just be moved to a different section, you should do that yourself, not simply blank it.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 00:51, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

You might want to have a closer look at your own edits before making up nonsense about other peoples'. Favre provided a source that clarified the main formatting issue you had, and then you reverted that change without explanation. Your other issue, that it "looks terrible", is and never has been a valid excuse to change formatting in a Wikipedia article which is something that I am sure you are aware of. You also added content to the cast section that does not belong there, which is not my problem to deal with I'm afraid. I don't spend time here just to clean-up your mess. You never actually explained the issue you had with the phrase "Also in the month". And finally, [redacted] is literally a scene from Infinity War—and one that was 100% in the released, cinematic version of the film—where Spider-Man is proclaimed to be an Avenger. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

No, I didn't "revert without explanation": I made a partial revert in two parts for convenience, and the article as I left it still had Favre's changed out source in place. He didn't solve the formatting issue anyway: can you cite a policy or guideline that supports your assertion that Your other issue, that it "looks terrible", is and never has been [sic] a valid excuse to change formatting in a Wikipedia article? You never actually explained the issue you had with the phrase "Also in the month". Do I have to? Isn't it self-evident? As for Spidey being "an Avenger now": OK, you're right. I forgot about that line (I've actually seen the film through six or seven times, but four of those were on a Chinese airline, so it's possible that line was cut for whatever reason). That said, it's entirely possible that Spidey will only be appearing in flashbacks to before that scene, making it an inaccurate description, or that as soon as he shows up in the film he'll say "I'm not an Avenger anymore", given how much the films have flip-flopped on this particular problem and how likely it is, given the financial success of Venom, that Spider-Man (the film rights to which character are still technically owned by a separate company) will be quietly exiting the MCU at some point in the near future. This is why these character descriptions should be cited to reliable secondary sources specifically discussing the film in questions, not secondary sources discussing other related films, or the films themselves, or especially not other related films.

BTW, I've removed the YouTube link from your above post. It looks like a bootleg upload, as I doubt "Mr. Spoiler" gets permission from all the copyright holders to upload their unedited footage to YouTube. Do not re-add it; you can ask Huggums537 what will happen if you revert this removal, or if you post any more such links anywhere on Wikipedia now that I have warned you.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I literally gave you the diffs showing your revert of Favre's reference update. MOS:ITALICTITLE. No, it is not self-evident, apparently. And that seems like a more valid argument re Spider-Man which you should take to the appropriate talk page (which isn't here). Also, I have asked you before to not tell me what to do or threaten me, especially at my own talk page. I think you will find that you get much better responses from people when you treat them how you would want to be treated. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:49, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, you gave the diffs, and completely misrepresented their contents -- I reinstated my edit after Favre reverted it without explanation, and left intact the one part he had explained, while you reverted me with the the hypocritical assertion that I (but not Favre or you) am not allowed make such reverts. MOS:ITALICTITLE clearly doesn't apply to "Untitled Avengers" anymore than to "Untitled Avengers film", "untitled Avengers film" or "Untitled Avengers Film", and it is applied inconsistently throughout our article (and throughout the original cited source; still haven't checked the new one). And no, the burden is on you to get consensus to re-add the primary-sourced content you are arguing for (which I would contend is OR), so you should be the one taking it to the talk page. Anyway, your behaviour clearly has not improved at all, and if User:Swarm had not just done me two other favours by semi-protecting Talk:James Gunn (curious how neither you nor any of the other stewards of the MCU articles have been protecting that BLP from vandalism and attacks...) and blanking another user's canvassing I would ask him to enforce the final warning he placed on you two months ago. This is not a "threat", but rather the opposite: I do not intend to do what I really should do, because of unrelated external factors. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 22:16, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, that's not what happened. Favre provided the Variety source which you did indeed retain in your subsequent revert, but then immediately after you realised that you had "forgotten" something and, as can be seen in the diff I provided above, you reverted the source change as well. To this day, the article is not using the improved Variety source that Favre provided, so I really don't know what you are on about. I reverted your edit because (a) I was restoring Favre's Variety source since all you said about it was "Note that I haven't checked the new ref yet, so I don't know but suspect it might not solve the problem" (not your best work) and (b) I was reverting your other changes with explanations given. This included the title formatting, because currently we are approaching "Untitled Avengers" as an actual title. If you disagree with that interpretation then the standard approach would be to go to the article's talk page and raise your concerns there. I am well within my right to contest the addition of non-cast information in the cast section without needing to sort out the mess myself. And finally, saying that something is not a threat does not mean it is not one. I know that you are just waiting for me to do something that you can use to get me banned, but until then my priority will always be improving and maintaining these articles. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:58, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

X-Men: Films In Development

For the Films in Development Section on the X-Men film franchise page, Marvel Cinematic Universe needs to be it's own section. That is because it will be a reboot of the current franchise and we can't have a reboot in the development section because they are two franchises. Having one franchise in the development section of the other franchise doesn't make sense. Mystic Moore (talk) 02:38, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a source saying it will be a reboot? If that is the case, then it probably should not be listed at that article at all. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

You make a fair point. There has been no current confirmation of a reboot but (my opinion, off-record) I doubt that they will integrate a twenty year franchise into the MCU. But whatever happens, there will be a REBOOT of some kind. That is definite. Because it has already been CONFIRMED that X-Men are joining the MCU. So even if everything that has happened in this franchise is not rebooted, the history would be changed to integrate those other characters and storylines. Mystic Moore (talk) 06:37, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Uhh, what? We don't know if there will be a reboot or not, like you said, so how do you also think that there will be one? I'm not sure what any of that was supposed to mean. Regardless, we DO NOT know if there will be a reboot or not, so we should not say so in the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, true. We can't say it is a reboot because it has not been explicitly confirmed but the X-Men integrating into another franchise deserves more than just being put in the 'Films in Development' section. It needs it's own section and while we're on the matter, there also needs to be more information in the 'Marvel Cinematic Universe' section. Two lines simply does not cover the news about it in the last eleven months. And to clarify, the X-Men WILL join the MCU (CONFIRMED) so integrating the two franchises will mean a reboot for the X-Men. That WILL change the future of their movies as they will now be part of this universe with the Avengers in it. I have not reverted it yet, nor I will until you agree with me but to me, this is really important. Mystic Moore (talk) 09:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

You keep changing your mind halfway through your comments! Do you want to say that there will be a reboot or not?! - adamstom97 (talk) 18:27, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ant-Man and the Wasp

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ant-Man and the Wasp you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tplaza64 -- Tplaza64 (talk) 01:21, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

MCU Good Topic things

I've been thinking for a bit that in the next set of nominations (adding the 2018 films), I think we should remove the Avengers accolades list and not consider the additional Black Panther articles for consideration. My thinking is because it has been noted the Black Panther box office list will not become a featured list per multiple editors feelings on the matter. If that can't become a featured list, and we were to keep it in the scope of the good topic, the topic would result in removal because the article isn't a FL. And on the topic, given that Luke Cage and Iron Fist were both cancelled, if we see what happens with any potential pick up, I felt it might be good to merge back the character lists to the respective main articles. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

I agree with that first part, and I think we can deal with that once we get through this GA review and get Infinity War promoted as well. As for the character lists, I am more sceptical about that. Even with only two seasons it can be a lot of content for the series article. My example would be Agent Carter. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

True, but at least in the current state of both Iron Fist and Luke Cage character lists, they have no where near the amount of content for characters that the Agent Carter list does. I just feel, given as it is currently, it will be a large task to get them any where near the amount of content we have on the Agent Carter list, especially for the recurring characters. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I guess that's fair. As long as it looks somewhat like the list at The Defenders and not like we are trying to cram the Agent Carter list into a full series article. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely. If it was Agent Carter level of content, I wouldn't have thought there was a need to re-merge. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:18, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm just going to continue this general MCU thread and bring up a couple other things:

• I am happy to go ahead and try this character list merge for Iron Fist and Luke Cage, dependent on what else I have to get done today. I will just be using the current state of The Defenders as a model for a more polished version of them.
• Good work with the small reformat you just did with the different streaming services at the main MCU page. I have actually been thinking that it would make a bit more sense to start thinking of the Netflix series and the Disney streaming series as sort of their own things, since things like development and general reception are sort of grouped for them and the ABC/Freeform/Hulu shows are generally talked about as separate things. I'm not suggesting we jump in and do anything major now, but I could see us having separate lists for those and making the list of TV shows even more of an overview than it already is.
• I also do feel we need to have a think about what is in the scope of what page, as I think there is room to move some of the specific development info from the main page to some of the sub lists, which would let us focus on MCU-wide issues at the main page like the potential for crossover between film and TV. I don't know what your thoughts on that are.
• Also good work with what you have started in your sandbox re Team Thor. I know you are just getting started, but I wanted to remind you that we have some stuff from Feige on it at Marvel One-Shots#Potential projects that could be useful.
• I am interested in nominating Black Panther (soundtrack) for GA, and I am pretty happy with how it is sitting at the moment. I have considered splitting it into score and soundtrack album articles, but I honestly feel that it works better as it is even though it feels in a few places like we are talking about two different things. Because of that, I nominated it for peer review to see if others are concerned by having them both in the same article, and so far there have been no issues with this. Unless you had any thoughts on this, I was thinking of just nominating it for GA if nothing comes of the peer review.
• Do you think we need to follow up on this Ant-Man and the Wasp GA review?
• On a related (but more personal) note, I am hoping that we will start to get some of these other GA reviews popping up soon. My nomination of Luke Cage (season 1) is the oldest unreviewed nomination, and has been so for a little while now. I've been reviewing a few myself recently so hopefully a bit of that goodwill gets back around soon.
• Finally, have you seen what I have been doing in my sandbox for Tony Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe)? I had been meaning to sort it out for a while and suddenly found the time and interest to get started the other day. If I get it to a place that I am happy with then I will probably just drop a note at the article's talk page before making the change, but I do expect some opposition since I will be removing a whole lot of in-universe information that I think is common at articles like this.

Sorry for the info dump, just trying to cover everything that is going on at the moment - adamstom97 (talk) 20:29, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

• Sure, let's see what comes of the remerged info if it's worth pursuing.
• Thanks. So are you thinking of two new lists, one for Marvel TV series and one for Marvel Studios ones, eventually?
• We've always seemed to work that the sublists were just that, the lists of each thing, with development at the main page. But I could see moving some development info to each list. Don't know if it is quite necessary yet.
• Thanks. I remembered we had wanted to reformat that article so I felt I'd getting something started. I was considering pulling some of the info from the One-Shots potential projects, but I felt it didn't fit well. And while I haven't explored much of the other films, most of the development is for the first film, so I was thinking of having one production section, and for each plot, making it one section with three paragraphs (and the table). It's definitely still a work in progress to hit when I have some time. Feel free to work in there too.
• Yes I saw the peer review request. I think it's fine all as one article, and am fine with you going ahead with the GA nomination. Though I think peer reviews usually have to be up for a month? Not sure.
• Definitely. If a full week since they started the review has gone by and they don't respond or show indication of editing elsewhere, we should go to the GA nom talk page.
• Same. We're going to start getting a back log of nominations I feel. Also very surprised no one bit at Infinity War yet, given Black Panther was taken almost immediately.
• Kind of? I saw you started something but didn't get a chance to really look over what you were doing.

No problem on the info dump! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:01, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

My thinking on the division of content among the main MCU page and the sublists is that if we decide at some point that we think there is too much development and reception stuff at the main page and maybe want to split up some of the more specific stuff to the sublists, then we might also want to think about the TV sublist having its own sublists. So I was just thinking something like MCU (franchise-wide stuff) > Films (all phases for now), TV (general overview plus specifics on ABC, Freeform, Hulu, etc.) > Netflix shows (specifics on the development of and reception to the Netflix shows for their own list, with recurring characters table), Disney streaming shows (eventually; development of and reception to these). This is all just ideas for the future though. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Luke Cage (season 1)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Luke Cage (season 1) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 14:01, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Luke Cage (season 1)

The article Luke Cage (season 1) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Luke Cage (season 1) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Why is Lesley Ann Warren not noteworthy as a guest on Daredevil? I mean, really. She is a movie star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpeate (talk • contribs) 21:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)