Talk:Jessica Jones (TV series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Mike Colter

The source used to verify that Colter is a part of the cast says "The Following‘s Mike Colter, believed to be the choice for male lead Luke Cage." First, it is important to note that Deadline qualified their claim with "believed". Colter might believed to be the choice but it doesn't mean that he is. Beliefs can often be placed incorrectly. Secondly, it says that he is their "choice". Marvel may want Colter but it doesn't say that an offer has been made or that Coulter has accepted. Negotiations too often break down.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I noticed this too. We should adjust accordingly here, and remove at the List of tv series page. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, waiting is probably the best option. I had seen the wording "top choice" used on another page, which is not what the source says. Common sense would lead to the conclusion that using him for testing actresses would mean he has been cast but there is certainly a large element of OR in that. -Fandraltastic (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Ready to move to mainspace?

@TriiipleThreat, Richiekim, Fandraltastic, and Adamstom.97: Thoughts? Maybe a quick c/e and format change, as I know Adam has done with Daredevil, AoS and Agent Carter. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not that familiar with WP:TV notability guidelines, but we only have 18 used sources and it has not gone into production. That said, I'm okay with it if everyone else is.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

We have some cast and crew, an official announcement, a release date for next year, and filming details, so I would be happy to go ahead with the move. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

And I am happy with the current divisions in the production section. I think everything is where it should be. Unless there is any opposition, I say we should go for it. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I've looked in WP:TV and haven't found the principal photography restrictions for creating an article that WP:Film does, so I don't see a reason for not moving this to the mainspace. Richiekim (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

With Marvel announcing the 2015 premiere and the lead being set it can probably be safely moved to mainspace. Without the date I would have been inclined to wait. -Fandraltastic (talk) 23:08, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Just for reference, Daredevil only had about 8 refs when it went into mainspace. It seems we are all in some form of agreement. I will WP:BEBOLD and make the move, as long as I can over the redirects I just created. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:46, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

...and my redirect creation forced me to be unable to perform the move. Will approach an admin to take care of this. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Now that we did the move, anyone want to think up some DYKs to submit? I realized we missed out on doing one for Daredevil when it entered the main space. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit Warring

IP Address user, 207.237.205.95, is edit warring. And there has been no discussion on any party regarding the release date. As I understand it, 3 or more reverting edits is edit warring. Which means person/IP address should be blocked, temporarily or permanent.
DarienLeonhart (talk) 04:15, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, IP reached out to Adamstom.97 and started a discussion there, of which I responded there. Then they reverted me again. But they should have started a discussion here, and well, now there is a place for them if they want to voice their opinion further on the matter. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:36, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Title change

According to this article, Marvel has confirmed that the title of the show has changed to Marvel's Jessica Jones. Richiekim (talk) 03:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk about it deciding on how it should be done instead of warring about it in edits and reverts.
DarienLeonhart (talk) 05:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Filming wrapped?

So according to this very unreliable source, filming has apparently wrapped (at the end of July)(a few days ago in August). Internet sleuths, let's see if we can find an RS to add to the page! (So far I can't find one, beyond this site and the instagram post from the cake person.) - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

The wrap party (according to Krysten Ritter's various social networking accounts) was on 25 July, but they didn't wrap then. David Tennant remained in NY shooting (reshoots/pick ups?) for a week after that, returning to the UK at the beginning of August. Photos of road closure signs for Violet posted to Twitter indicated filming went on into August. I read that they have wrapped now, but I can't remember where. But their final day of shooting was in August, not July. Sorry for not being able to provide sources. Starhunterfan (talk) 14:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I misread the link I provided. They said filming was finished a few days ago, but the party was in July. If you do come across the sources (social media is acceptable as long as they are "verified") don't hesitate to post them here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Episode titles

If you have a Netflix account and are logged in, the URL http://www.netflix.com/title/80002312 gives you the title of the first episode. Incrementing the title # gives you all the rest, which someone on Reddit posted as follows:

1x01 - AKA Ladies Night (52m) 1x02 - AKA Crush Syndrome (52m) 1x03 - AKA It's Called Whiskey (54m) 1x04 - AKA 99 Friends 1x05 - AKA The Sandwich Saved Me (50m) 1x06 - AKA You're a Winner (54m) 1x07 - AKA Top Shelf Perverts 1x08 - AKA WWJD? 1x09 - AKA Sin Bin 1x10 - AKA The Kumbaya Circle Jerk 1x11 - AKA I've Got the Blues 1x12 - AKA Jewel and the Power Man 1x13 - AKA Smile

(https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelstudios/comments/3hko0a/jessica_jones_episode_titles_are_out/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bflaminio (talk • contribs) 13:43, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Just tried this and it works. It would also be permissible per WP:PAYWALL.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:12, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Same. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:36, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Just wanting to check because the Reddit page raises a question about this information, does this actually confirm the episode numbers or are we just assuming these are in the correct order? Ruffice98 (talk) 19:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I just checked with Daredevil, and starting with ep 1 and increasing the last number by one bring you to ep 2, so I think it is a safe understanding to believe doing so with this yields the same results. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:52, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

@TriiipleThreat: So Netflix found their gaff and users can no longer recreate this to see the titles. Given that, would you be opposed to using this Comic Book Resources or /Film article as the source now? Even though they sources back to Reddit, both you and I were able to see the titles on Netflix so we know there is legitimacy there. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:13, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't think so since both of those reports are based on reddit and not independent research. And we can't cite our own experience per WP:OR. You might want to ask the notice board.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:41, 19 August 2015 (UTC)÷

Kyrsten Ritter interview

Here's a good interview with Kyrsten Ritten with lots of useful information from episode #200.5 of the "This Week in Marvel" podcast. Ritter's interview starts around the 46 minute mark. I can't find a good transcript of it but we can transcribe it ourselves and cite it with Template:Cite AV media.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:53, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

@TriiipleThreat: The ref is already in the article (currently ref 9), as I used it to cite filming ending and something for Ritter's character paragraph. I didn't find anything else of use from the interview that stood out, but others are welcome to add something they feel is good. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:00, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Ah, very well. The section seems to cover the topic pretty well. But if you rather quote the actress herself than others, then there are a few lengthy quotes you can pull from.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

That's true. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:29, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Streaming date

Looks like 11/20/2015 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=ywZE-NEJ2Ik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bflaminio (talk • contribs) 14:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Starring Cast

I was bold and changed the order of the cast based on the Netflix page and it was reverted because Marvel was a better source. There are several reliable sources that stated early on that Mike Colter will be in 6 or 7 episodes which seems to contradict him being in a starring role. My guess is that he will be listed in the starring cast for those episodes in which he appears in the same way that they did for Rosario Dawson in Daredevil (most likely a contractual thing), but that would be original research. The Netflix page is being used to determine the order for the Luke Cage series. Thoughts from others? - DinoSlider (talk) 05:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not totally against the idea, I was just going off of what we usually do, which is follow the Marvel releases first and foremost. Although Colter was initially said to be recurring, he has been listed as starring by Marvel, and even if it is only 6 or 7 episodes, that would still be considered starring (like with Dawson, as you mentioned) if he is billed as such. I have been a bit mistrustful of Netflix in terms of whether they are actually listing the proper billing since they seem to change their listing reasonably often, and until recently they only had two or three actors listed. In fact, for me anyway, they currently don't list Traval, who was announced alongside some of the other main cast and would therefore be the same as them, we assumed, so that again makes me feel a bit iffy about using Netflix. But I would like to know what others are thinking. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Adam that I'm not against it, but we should probably wait. I've seen the listing Netflix has had for a while, and debated changing it, but went against doing so. I do feel that Colter is going to be "recurring", but will probably still be credited as a main actor, even if it is only for a few appearances. So most likely, he may move down the list, and others may get added. So I think we should stick to what we have, and wait it out. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:25, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

It sounds like we are all pretty much in agreement. I also had pause, but decided to be bold when I saw it being used on the Luke Cage page. On the other hand, I had no problem with it being reverted. Good discussion. - DinoSlider (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

It's all kind of hit an miss really. Because on LC, we got that Scarfe was going to be recurring, but the way Marvel announced it, he seemed to be starring, along with Dawson. But Dawson isn't on Netflix's page. So it's really trying to piece together two equally reliable sources. But we all know going in it will all shift as soon as the episodes air, and we get the listing. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I did notice that in the Marvel release for Luke Cage, they said such and such is "to star" for all of them except Dawson, who they said just "reprises her role". Also, Marvel released some photos from Jessica Jones today, and in that release they reaffirmed the cast listing that we have here. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Thousand eyes

Before I get into trouble, I've been told to stop adding in this information someone else decided to revert it. Can we get a consensus here? Marvel has officially used Of Monsters and Men's song to promote Jessica Jones. That's simple, and it's notable. I don't see a reason to exclude it from the music section of this article. Does anyone object? And if so, why? Osh33m (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Just simply using a song in marketing doesn't make it notable. The reason it's is used is what makes it notable. There needs to be commentary on why Marvel used the Of Monsters and Men's song (ie symbolism, relevant lyrics, good tempo etc.) This is similar to the WP:TRAILER guideline, that simply stating a trailer/teaser has debuted is not notable in and of itself. That's why it doesn't fit to make a mention. As another example, Marvel used "Bad Reputation" in one of the short teases. There isn't any reason to mention that, as with this song. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Regardless, it shouldn't be included in the music section because it's not used in the show but the trailer. If anything, it should be placed in the marketing section. Music in trailers are typically handled by the marketing department, which does not necessarily have the same art direction as the show.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 06:01, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll accept that then. Any objections to having this piece of information posted on the marketing section? Osh33m (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Again, as long as you can provide some commentary or background information that proves its use is notable. We don't even add the release of trailers to the marketing section unless we have that sort of thing, so we definitely need it for this song. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:11, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Why is all that necessary? Put yourself in the readers' shoes. When they come to wikipedia, they're looking for all the information they get. They could be coming to this page in part to find out what the song in the trailers is. If it's not here they'll have to search elsewhere on the internet to find it - when it's simple information that should be on wikipedia for the reader to find out. Marvel used it twice so they saw the song fitting, that should be all the background information necessary. Osh33m (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I highly doubt that knowing the song from the trailers will help a reader know more about the show. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information which this would definitely fall under, unless, as I and Adam have stated, there is some sort of commentary discussing the use of the song in the trailers. If someone wants to know what the song is, they can just Google it and find the answer really quickly. They don't need it to be on Wikipedia to help them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies here. As an encyclopedia, we do not list every verifiable piece of information that is available to us. We only detail the information necessary to create a complete yet concise summary of the subject. IMHO, knowing the song used in the trailer isn't necessary for understanding of the show. However, my opinion is meaningless. What is important are the opinions of reliable sources. If reliable sources contain analytical information about song's use in the trailer then we can objectively conclude that this particular piece of information is worth including in the article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:58, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

How is this then? It talks about how the lyrics are dark and foreboding which allude to what's to come for the protagonist. http://www.bustle.com/articles/119028-whats-the-song-in-jessica-jones-trailer-it-has-a-perfectly-dark-sound-for-marvels-gritty Osh33m (talk) 17:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

That's the kind of useful analytical information that I was talking about! And as I mentioned before, it should accompany information regarding the trailer in the marketing section, not the music section.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:07, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Glad we could come to a consensus. I'd still rather it be in the music section since it is literally music, but at least it'll be in the article. Osh33m (talk)

Sorry to continue raining on the parade, but Bustle isn't a reliable source. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:00, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

From what I can tell from their About page, they don't seem to have any editorial oversight (that I can see) and the author of the article appears to be a contributor to the site, not a staff member. And it seems that anyone can apply to be a contributor, so that makes it unreliable. But if it was reliable, that's what we're looking for in adding the content. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Bustle is an online publication. It does appear that they employ a staff but they do not list their positions so I cannot comment on what editorial oversight they may or may not have. Also, just because they have volunteer contributors does not necessarily mean that it is a WP:SPS.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually it does appear that they have an editor.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright, can I put it back now? Come on, folks. Why does this have to be so difficult Osh33m (talk) 20:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Lets wait for Favre's response since he is the most vocal opposition, but don't sweat its all a part of the collaborative process and theres no rush.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Rachel Krantz bio page lists her as "Senior Features Editor at Bustle" and I don't know if the article we want to use is considered a "feature" (or frankly what one on the site is). To me, based on all that I've been finding about the site, it seems to be very similar to Buzzfeed in the type of content they produce, which doesn't make it reliable (similar to Buzzfeed in most cases). I think it may be worth bringing up a case at WP:RSN to see what others feel. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay so what do I have to do next. Osh33m (talk) 05:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Start a new discussion at WP:RSN asking if Bustle is reliable. Feel free to include the additional material I and Triiiple provided to try and support both sides that it is and isn't reliable. If you do start the discussion, please provide the link here so myself and others can find it and follow/comment at it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Season 1 poster

Should we get a second season and need to split off season 1 content, here is the poster for the season. I think. It's the only one really released. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:07, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Reception section

So as regular watchers of the page have probably seen, I've added a lot of reviews for the series over the past couple of days. At this moment, I personally have the amount of content and order of them that I'd like to see and feel is good for the article. However, I still feel like it is bit much for the section, possibly with the inclusion of the NYCC pilot reactions, though I do feel some of those have good material outside of what the "official series" reviews have given (I'm looking at the second full paragraph in particular). Just looking for others' opinions (particularly @Adamstom.97 and TriiipleThreat:'s) on what they feel about the section and what's there now, and if it is a bit much, should the first episode info go, or be condensed some. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I am happy with the section for now. Once the series has been released and some final reviews come out (most of these seem to be for the first 7 episodes only) then I think some c/e and condensing will be in order, but I don't think there is any reason to rush and start cutting stuff now. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Main cast

Pulled up the credits on the first three episodes and it looks like crediting is done like it was on Daredevil, with actors only receiving credit for episodes they're in. Moriarty and Darville are both credited as being main cast members in all three and Traval shows up in the credits of the third episode. But all are definitely credited as regulars, in the order I added. Cheers -Fandraltastic (talk) 08:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Critical reception?

"Critical reception for the series was overwhelmingly positive, with praise being given to Ritter and Tennant for their performances" - Umm, no sourcing on this - is this based on any facts, the writers opinion or is it something added by someone working for Netflixs/ Marvel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.198.57 (talk) 03:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Statements in the lead paragraph are generally not sourced, because they are summary statements of the contents of the article (which are sourced). So, in this case, this sentence in question should be supported by sources in the Critical Reception section of the article. --SubSeven (talk) 04:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Episode summaries

I have begun to add episode summaries. I would welcome any help. We should probably keep them pretty simple and avoid spoilers until more people have had a change to watch the entire season. SpiritedMichelle (talk) 01:32, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Oppose. Please read WP:SPOILER. –Dark Cocoa Frosting (talk) 11:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Article image

A user has uploaded the "title screen" here, File:Jessica_Jones_logo.png. It is not all that different from the current logo, File:Jessica Jones Netflix.jpg, and the current one is actually a better sizing and placement of the text. I don't see this as a similar situation to Daredevil, in which the character appeared behind the logo, resulting in a worthwhile change. Anyone else's thoughts? If others believe the "title screen" should be used, we should stick to one file name (the .jpg one for history preservation) and some amount of cropping / resizing definitely needs to be done. But I don't think we need to do that, because what we have now works. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't see why not. I think there is enough difference to make the change, and since we basically have the new version already it won't be difficult to change over the image. Besides, I'm sure people will keep trying to change it if we don't. But I agree that we need to update the current image rather than use a separately uploaded version. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright. I've added the cropped version of the title screen appearance to the former image name. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Possible "Writing" material

Good material from Rosenberg here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Forbes opinion piece in MCU tie-ins section

I question the addition of the commentary from the aforementioned article in the MCU tie-ins section. The author's ignorance informs his opinion, leading to statements such as "Jessica Jones almost refuses to acknowledge Daredevil at all" which are blatantly wrong. If we talked more about how the author struggled to find blatant or overt references to the MCU and Daredevil then maybe I would agree, but as it is we are giving a lot of weight to the incorrect suggestion by this single critic that this series doesn't have a lot of connections to the MCU. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I added it because I read it as pointing out that the series does not acknowledge events of Daredevil, which is true. There's no mention (even just in passing or on TV screens) to the Devil of Hell's Kitchen or Fisk, which could have been done. That's what I was going for with the inclusion, so maybe we can rework it to better represent that. And if we need to be neutral, we can find a more positive commentary. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:21, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I think if we were to rework it a bit then another, more positive commentary wouldn't be necessary. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference for use

Here's an interesting article about the series' thematical use of sexism.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:20, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Here's another about the use of rape in the series. I'm sensing an "Analysis" section in reception might be worthwhile to create, to house these two articles, plus any others that are coming out / have been published. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

And this for race and sexuality. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Or "Themes".--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Something else for the Analysis section. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:38, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

This article made the Top 25 Report

This article was the 2nd most popular on Wikipedia according to the Top 25 Report with 1,599,328 views for the week November 22 to 28, 2015. This followed the series' release November 20. Congratulations to the editors of this article for the exposure of their work.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Wow. "Technically" it was #1, in my opinion, as the comic character article got a bunch of the views with readers most likely looking for this article. Great job everyone. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Rebecca De Mornay as Dorothy Walker Recurring?

She is credited in 3 episodes. What makes her reccuring? Mike210381 (talk) 19:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

As I was watching, I thought she hit 4, but I could be wrong. I thought it was: the episode Jessica visits her at the talent agency; the episode when she and Trish take Jessica from her original home; the episode when the flashbacks occur; the episode when she visits Trish in the hospital. Are some of these the same episode? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I can confirm that she was only credited in three episodes: 7, 11, and 12. - DinoSlider (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay great. See as I was watching, I wrote down credits to add here later, and I think I did that with episode 11 for her. I must have thought the first two instances I listed above were in two different episodes. I'll make the change. Thanks all. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I moved De Mornay to the list of recurring characters.SpiritedMichelle (talk) 18:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

The consensus rule is to limit the recurring list to those that have appeared in four or more episodes, as noted in the source. - DinoSlider (talk) 19:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Howard Klein

I just saw Sue Kastle's edit adding Howard Klein's name in the EP section of infobox. This is partially correct. He does not appear in the opening credits, only in the credits at the end. As such, that makes me question if he should be included in the infobox. (Note he is listed in the development section.) For comparison, all of Daredevil's EPs are listed in the opening credits. I am not sure if there is any type of distinction for being credited in the opening only, versus only in the end credits, and can reach out to the TV project for additional input should we need it. But thoughts are welcome. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:54, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing this up for me instead of just reverting my edit without an explanation. Sue Kastle (talk) 20:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Jessica Jones can't fly

In Cast and Characters the article says Jessica Jones has super strength and flight, but Jessica Jones states in the series at least twice she can't fly and we only ever see her jumping, not actually flying. She calls it a "guided fall." 80.99.221.200 (talk) 03:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Adjusted. Added "limited" before flight. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Captain Simpson

I have noticed in several reviews and fan pages (besides noticing it myself) that the character of Will Simpson has a huge visual similarity with the MCU Steve Rogers. Many also speculate that it is a more subtle way to make reference to the Nuke character than painting a flag on his face. I also noticed that Traval has dark brown hair, but it was colored to blond to play the TV character. I would suspect it to be very unlikely to be just a mere coincidence. But is there some interview or confirmation from the creators about this similarity that we can use? Reviewer's speculations are just that, speculations, and can't be considered a reliable source about this point. Cambalachero (talk) 16:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Nothing official as I can tell. But reliable review sites could be used with the following wording (or similar): "[Reviewer] noted the similarity between Simpson and Rogers, stating [X]". It is not saying that it is something that was intentional or "official" but just brings up the fact that it could have been an intentional thing. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:52, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Will Simpson's name is linked to Nuke. That is the character from the comics that most fans assume is portrayed in the series. Could be wrong though.SpiritedMichelle (talk) 02:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Cast list format

Why is the format for this show and other MCU Netflix shows different from almost every other show on wikipedia. As majority and almost 75% of shows, when a new cast member is introduced or leaves the show in a later season; the season they join is listed next to their name. Eg. - Leah Gibson as Inez Green (Season 2): A "street-wise" nurse. This is the format for shows such as Peaky Blinders, The Crown, Orange Is the New Black, Modern Family, Westworld, Silicon Valley and Boardwalk Empire, just to name a few. Just curious as to why the format is different for this show and characters aren't listed as the season they appear/introduced in. Stuv3 (talk) 09:25, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Please note that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument to include something; what may work for one article may not work for another. Also, seven shows is not "almost every other show on wikipedia". Cast listings primarily exist to list cast, their character and a brief description, and often real-world information about the cast/character. Seasons-specific detail can be include in the relative season article or the Casting section. -- Alex^TW 09:29, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

No need to be a smartass, i merely just listed a couple of examples. It is however, fair to say that majority of shows on wikipedia if not all are apart from n increasingly small number are listed in this format. Why is this one of very few exceptions?, why does it not work?. Honestly just curious as to why it doesn't work and how it is different to other shows. Stuv3 (talk) 09:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Not being a smartass, I'm just saying how it is. As for your claim, I disagree. As an editor of almost four years, I've edited hundreds of TV articles, and I've come across a lot more that don't use the season format in the cast list than those that do. WP:LOCALCONSENSUS and WP:CONSENSUS are big ones that come into play - if the majority of editors agree that they're not required, then we don't include them. -- Alex^TW 10:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Also, numerous discussions around the TV project have concluded that we don't really want to do this. The information is still discussed elsewhere in the article anyway. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:14, 14 March 2018 (UTC)