User talk:TriiipleThreat/Archive 10

Happy New Year, TriiipleThreat!


Happy New Year! TriiipleThreat, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

– Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 00:37, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Your GA nomination of Generations (comics)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Generations (comics) 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 Argento Surfer -- Argento Surfer (talk) 16:03, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * FYI, I'll be offline this weekend and there's a very good chance work will be busy on Monday, so I may not be able to respond to any updates or comments until Tuesday. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problem. I was about to send you the same message.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Generations (comics)
The article Generations (comics) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Generations (comics) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Argento Surfer -- Argento Surfer (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Rules for comics images ?
About the edit you recently reverted on the A-Force article, I'd like to know which criterion were you based on to determine when an image is "necessary" or not in a comic article. For example, why the Avengers comics article has images from different volumes of the series apart from the main displayed on the infobox? Another example: if you take a look at George Pérez article you'll see a lot of NFCC images. Following your explanation to revert my edit, are all of them "necessary" for the article? I don't think so. At least, not the whole covers displayed there.

I also noticed that you changed the 300px image I had uploaded (File:A-Force.jpg) restoring it to 256px. I haven´t found any guidance on WP:NFCC that specifies a certain size for comic covers.

I know you're a more experienced user in comics contents, so that's why I'm requesting you an answer. Moreover, if you can provide me a link for further assistance about this issue, I'd be greatful. Fma12 (talk) 23:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * All non-free content must exceed our Non-free content criteria. In this case, I was objecting to WP:NFCC as I fail to see what makes the image’s inclusion significant to the understanding of the article. As for the other articles, please beware that WP:OTHERSTUFF exists and Wikipedia routinely fails to meets its own standards. Also per WP:IMAGERES: the resolution for non-free images should be less than 100,000 pixels.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Black Panther
Will do. Have seen it. I think you'll like it a lot. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Colleen Wing.JPG
Thanks for revert. Time I checked all the new oversized uploads (about 70 every day!) and got round to adding the tag, you added the smaller image - c'ést la vie :-) I can confirm that DatBot would not have reduced it any more, had it not been noticed! Ron h jones (Talk) 19:14, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * No problem. Also I meant to say "254 × 393", not "294 × 393" in my edit summary.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Evangeline Lilly and Paul Rudd as Wasp and Ant-Man.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Evangeline Lilly and Paul Rudd as Wasp and Ant-Man.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:48, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

"Highest-grossing" rank
I understand that these statements can be written to reflect the film's peak accomplishment, or it can also be written to reflect its current ranking. What I'm witnessing is that across the MCU and other films, this is not entirely consistent; some are current, others are peak. The other problem you have to consider is the tedious process of maintaining "current" rankings across dozens of articles as their ranking changes, as opposed to just mentioning its peak accomplishment. Touching it once and leaving it seems like a better approach. All we have to do is add the phrase "during its theatrical run" to make it clear that this is a peak ranking. An example is how its written at the first Avengers film.

I'm not sure this needs to be taken to the WT:FILM just yet until we at least understand each other's perspective. Curious to hear your thoughts. Thanks in advance... --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * My question is do we really need its peak if we also give its year-in-film rank? The year-in-film rank and the current rank I think would answer readers' curiosity of how the film stood up then and how it stands up now.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure the year-in-film rank describes all that much in terms of historical value. For example, right now there are four films from 2015 in the top 7 of all-time gross. Furious 7 is the third-highest of 2015, but yet it is ranked very high at 6th all-time. Then look at Transformers: Age of Extinction which was the top grosser of 2014, but it's only ranked 19th currently all-time. The correlation between the release year ranking and the all-time ranking can vary wildly. Some years are just very bad compared to others. I think as a reader, I want to know more about the film's best accomplishments that occurred during its theatrical run, and then if I want to know how that's held up over time, I'd read more about it down in the article's body. A current ranking that gets more and more insignificant as time goes on (as the film slides down the list) may not be something we necessarily need to track in the lead, but I'm open to hearing your thoughts about that. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:31, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Just to add... At some point, the film's best ranking (or peak ranking) becomes more significant than its current ranking, especially once that current ranking drops into the 20s and 30s. The better of the two accomplishments clearly becomes the peak ranking. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The year-in-film IMO is the better judge of historical value, because it looks at the entire year versus one moment in time. Who cares if a film was the X highest grossing film if it were bumped down the next month by another film. That one month on top may give a reader an inaccurate impression of the films success. Likewise, I agree that the current ranking may one day become irrelevant but we would still have the year-in-film rank to fall back on.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * In the same breath, being the top performer for a given year could also give an inaccurate impression, especially when you take my 2014 example. 2014 was one of the worst performing years in the past two decades, yet someone who wasn't aware of this may inappropriately assume the top grosser – Age of Extinction – did better than a movie like Age of Ultron that was only ranked 4th in its respective year. Obviously, you would be incorrect in assuming this.Also, I'm not sure why you believe I was only looking at one moment in time. The list of highest-grossing films covers the entire recorded history of film. My argument is that the peak value there holds greater importance. It gives readers a sense of how well a film did during its theatrical run when stacked against all films that came before it. So for Age of Ultron, its peak ranking would have been stacked against over 70 years of box office history. It's not just covering one moment in time. The other concern is that this gives readers a sense of the mark it left during the time it was relevant (its theatrical run). The current ranking, which is still important but to a lesser extent, doesn't focus on the time period the movie existed in. So far, I haven't heard why you disagree with that, nor have I heard what you think about the inconsistencies between MCU films such as Avengers 1 vs Avengers 2; the former uses the peak ranking while the latter uses the current ranking. Is there a consensus on which one we should use? If so, when/where was this consensus formed? --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:35, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Age of Ultron is a good example. It peaked at #5 but was beaten by both Jurassic World and the Force Awakens within months. Its brief time at #5 is rather insignificant and meaningless when compared to other films that were released that year. In this case, the lower current ranking is more meaningful as it is being compared to every film past and present. I am unaware of any consensus, so a larger discussion at WT:FILM is probably in order.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Chiming in here. I don't believe there has ever been any consensus on the matter, but I've felt including a film's peak position is the best way to go. That way, every weekend you're not going back to a bunch of films, readjusting the lead/article to state what it's new position is. The peak will never change and I don't feel it give a false sense of achievement if it is no longer at that position. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for weighing in Favre1fan93. It's funny, because I just realized that Age of Ultron is actually a good example for both arguments! But yes, the fact that Age of Ultron achieved the 5th position against all movies that came before it is a pretty big accomplishment, even if it only lasted months. Looking at other examples, such as Age of Extinction, the current ranking is 19 and will constantly drop off from there. You have to ask yourself, when it gets to 25 or 30, would it still be worth mentioning in the lead? If I read 25 or 30, would I think it ever accomplished anything other than being the top performer of a bad year? Probably not, and certainly that number won't be as important as its peak position of 10.There isn't a clear answer here, but thank you TriiipleThreat for at least taking the time to help me understand where you're coming from. I agree we should take it to WT:FILM in the near future. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

your revert on some insignificant trite movie
Congratulations, you have successfully removed the last traces of genuinely important links from this one. -- Kku (talk) 14:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Files_for_discussion/2018_February_2
Hi TriiipleThreat. This discussion has now been closed as per your request at Requests for closure. I also restored the deleted file and put it into the Hope Pym article. Cheers, Fish +Karate 15:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Captain Marvel (film)
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Avengers Budget
Would love you to weigh in. I would also add that Emir was originally contesting it, but then he kept my edits and filled in the bare references, signalling he is fine with the addition (because why else would he keep it and improve on it?). But infobox rules are clear and we have more than a few reliable sources. Foodles42 (talk) 20:49, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Infinity War
Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I am about to unwatch the Infinity War article (and any related MCU articles) so I can avoid spoilers as best I can, in case you notice less activity from me on those articles in the coming days. I'm seeing the film Friday afternoon and can't wait. Also wanted to pass along a hearty enjoy for you as well when you get to see it. Can't believe we are only days away! See you on the other side! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Lazarus (comics)
Since you did the GA review for this one a while ago, I'm hoping you might be willing to weigh in on the FAC. It's nearing the two month mark, but it hasn't garnered much attention yet. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Will do when I get some more time to go through it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:48, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Captain Marvel
Those 2 people are not big stars Pulsifier220 (talk) 13:52, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter, they're listed as being stars of the film. Please read the editor's note in the starring field of the infobox.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Carol Danvers
Please use the Carol Danvers talk page, so as to avoid an edit war. DrRC (talk) 04:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Thor: Ragnarok
Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello Triiiple Threat
How are you able to edit a page which is locked???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Oye Hoye (talk • contribs)
 * Its because I am confirmed user.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Ant-Man in the Avengers sequel?
Is this a reliable source? 76.231.73.99 (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I think so, screenrant has been used elsewhere without much dilemma and has an editorial staff.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 10:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Marvel Creative Committee
Hi T3, I noticed this article on Collider about the Marvel Creative Committe and it goes into a lot of detail about their direct influence on limiting certain films. I came here to have a read and can see some brief mentions but as you are more familiar with the article, I was wondering if it would be of use to you. Was certainly eye opening for me anyway. Laters!
 * http://collider.com/why-the-end-of-the-marvel-creative-committee-has-led-to-bolder-mcu-movies/ Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 17:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, a lot of this is already at Marvel Cinematic Universe but there are a lot of details here that could be useful especially about the impact of the committee's dissolution on more recent films.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Category:X-Men characters
Isn't Category:X-Men characters the sort of category that has been deleted many times before? 208.47.202.254 (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Marvel properties not in MCU
My edit that you reverted was more to show that not all properties were included in the MCU - the Fox deal was not the reason I added that info, but just happened to be included because the separation might end. [] TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  17:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply
That’s totally fine, I was figuring that was probably the reason, same with Favre. Sorry if I was becoming a bother with the pinging. Rusted AutoParts 19:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Can’t go wrong with the double feature. Rusted AutoParts 19:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Ironheart display image
Hi, Trip! I wanted to talk to you regarding the Ironheart/Riri Williams page and a forthcoming "edit war" because of the reverting display imagery. UnathiJ10 (talk) 17:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for responding. Please discuss the changes that you wish to make on the article's talk page and try to build consensus before reverting.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, I was considering the changing of the Ironheart article by displaying her new armor from the recent promotions for the Champions comic book series. UnathiJ10 (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * This is the article's talk page (Talk:Riri Williams). I will go ahead and start it for you.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Heliopolitans and Asgardians
Hi there, I want to compliment you first on what you did with Heliopolitans - taking an article in pretty bad shape and turning it into something actually worth reading. My question is, would you ever be interested in working on the Asgardians article to get that one into similar shape? 208.47.202.254 (talk) 22:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you, it should probably just be redirected to Asgard (comics).—TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Plot summary states he is killed
Undid revision. The first paragraph of the current plot summary of Infinity Wars is stating that he is "killed". Put on Talk at article page if you are reverting again. FutureForecasts (talk) 16:52, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * That’s not the way this works. You made a bold edit, it was reverted, and now you’re expected to discuss, not revert the revert. The film is a work of fiction, there are many ways the character can reappear if he/she was “killed” in a previous film.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:14, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are invoking BRD then you need to start Talk page on the article Talk page and I will respond there. You can pick the Article page where you wish to start your invocation of BRD. You can repost this discussion here to start it and you can restate your point that you expect Loki to again "appear" after being killed in Part One, to use your preferred word, in the sequel to Infinity Wars along with your reliable sources for this. Your indication that you wish to invoke BRD states that you need to discuss the issue on the article Talk page, otherwise anyone may revert your edit. As a reminder, your next revert without starting Talk page discussion will be your third revert which is against BRD policy. FutureForecasts (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, the onus is on you as the one who is wishing to make the bold change. So if you still desire to implement your change, I suggest you take your own advice.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Black Panther
Hey, I know the BP summary has been pretty stable for a while, but reading over it again today while preparing for GA I realised that it has fallen a bit out of shape at some point. The silly tense issue for the start of the summary is back, where we are using both past and present tense to described the same events. I thought I came up with a good solution for that. Also, much of the summary has become structured with lots of commas and clauses. My c/e was trying to rearrange the content so it could flow much easier, so He and Okoye, the leader of the Dora Milaje regiment, extract Nakia, T'Challa's ex-lover, from an undercover assignment so she can attend his coronation ceremony... became He and Okoye, the leader of the Dora Milaje regiment, extract T'Challa's ex-lover Nakia from an undercover assignment so she can attend his coronation ceremony... for example. There are also a few things that seem to be missing, such as not actually saying that T'Challa wins the first challenge or not mentioning that T'Challa and Killmonger fight until a really awkward moment, which likely came about from lots of different editors working on it at once. And we start referring to "Erik" in the middle for some reason. Just feel like it needs quite a bit of work before we nominate it. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * :The tense isn’t an issue, it’s the same approach we have in Thor and Thor: The Dark World. Also it avoids the superfluous details of who is telling the story or even that a story is being told. I’m fine with your clause edits as long as they don’t increase the word count.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 10:21, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It says T’Challa defeats M’Baku and introduces Erik when the film does. The same with their fight.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * But it doesn't say he becomes king, I don't see why we should refer to "Erik" rather than our standard "Stevens", and their fight isn't mentioned until later on so it is confusing why they aren't mentioned while the others are fighting. Also, I am not convinced about changing tense just because we have done it before, and I don't see why it to be that way when there are better alternatives. The film never presents the backstory as something that is happening "currently", so why do we need to, with awkward wording to boot? - adamstom97 (talk) 11:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * You’re right we should be using surnames whenever possible. I don’t know what you mean about not mentioning their fight until later, since it doesn’t take place until later in the film. Also I don’t find the prologue wording awkward at all. And yes, it is presented as a backstory in the film, but we don’t need to follow the same route, especially when we can make it more concise. Who is telling the story and the fact that it is a story is irrelevant.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It just feels wrong to say "Centuries ago, people are doing things". It should be "Centuries ago, people were doing things" or we should find a way to not say how much time has passed until the end of the passage. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:20, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * How does this work as a compromise? When a meteorite containing vibranium crashes in Africa, it becomes the object of a war between five tribes. One warrior ingests a "heart-shaped herb" affected by the metal and gains superhuman abilities, becoming the first "Black Panther". He unites all but the Jabari Tribe to form the nation of Wakanda. Over centuries, the Wakandans use the vibranium to develop advanced technology and isolate themselves from the world by posing as a Third World country. I don't think it is ideal, but it fixes my issue with the tense without using the narrator route I tried before. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It could be more concise. For example: Five tribes war over a meteorite containing vibranium when it crashes in Africa. One warrior ingests a "heart-shaped herb" affected by the metal and gains superhuman abilities, becoming the first "Black Panther". He unites all but the Jabari Tribe to form the nation of Wakanda. Over centuries, the Wakandans use the vibranium to develop advanced technology and isolate themselves from the world by posing as a Third World country. Or Five African tribes war over a meteorite containing vibranium. One warrior ingests a "heart-shaped herb" affected by the metal and gains superhuman abilities, becoming the first "Black Panther". He unites all but the Jabari Tribe to form the nation of Wakanda. Over centuries, the Wakandans use the vibranium to develop advanced technology and isolate themselves from the world by posing as a Third World country, as not to increase the word count.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I've made the change following these suggestions. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Black Panther GA review
Hey Triiiple. I don't know if you've been following along with the review, but I was wondering if you'd be willing to look at the reviewers comments and add your thoughts to some of what they are stating? Adam and I have been responding, and I feel as though everyone is talking in circles for some of the matters brought up and we aren't making any progress on the remaining points. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry, for the late response, I'm going to be off and on for the next couple weeks. I'll take a look at it if get a free moment.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem. Adam and I seem to be working towards a mutually agreeable solution to some of the comments at the moment, but we would not oppose a third voice in the matter, if you wish. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Asgardians of the Galaxy
Hello! Your submission of Asgardians of the Galaxy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:33, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

WHY DID YOU REVERTED MY EDIT?
I noticed that you undid my revision on Avengers:Infinity War but I wanna ask why? Isn't Infinity War an epic film? If it isn't then it means you are disrespecting it asshole.2405:204:E585:C4D9:471:B3FB:342C:64D0 (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Your message here is in violation of Wikipedia's civility policy; this behavior is not acceptable. You are expected to communicate and collaborate respectfully with other editors and to refrain from making any personal attacks toward others; failure to do so will result in being blocked.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:49, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for comments on an FAC
The Infinity Gauntlet is currently a candidate as a Featured Article. If you have time, I'd appreciate any comments you may have. Thanks! Argento Surfer (talk) 20:07, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Asgardians of the Galaxy
— Maile (talk) 00:41, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Question
Re: this revert. So "comicbookmovie.com" is not a reliable source? This wasn't my edit so I'm only asking out of curiosity. I see that it was discussed at RSN a few years, but no apparent decision was made. I also noted that it is currently being cited on nine other articles. FYI - the WOLF  child  20:59, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It’s been discussed several times at the RS noticeboard, the blacklist, and at the film project. The current consensus is that since it is a user generated website it is generally considered a WP:SPS but exceptions have been made for exclusive interviews especially if they are accompanied by audio/video components.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:28, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I only found the one instance from 2015 with a search, but didnt check the blacklist and dont frequent WT:FILM very often. Thanks for the info. - the WOLF  child  21:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aquaman (film) poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Aquaman (film) poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cover of Thor Annual 12.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Cover of Thor Annual 12.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Guardians of The Galaxy 2
I wanted to know why my addition of a link to Stan Lee being the Watcher “informant” was reverted. It is accurate to the MCU. IronBridge (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Stan Lee is a person. The Watcher "informant" is a character he is portraying in the film. Thus it is not correct to link to him as such. Also previous discussions on the matter, which are on the film article's talk page. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:09, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Captain Marvel factoid
Hey Triiiple! Long time no talk it seems. Came across this interesting article about how Carol got her most recent costume design. Since you do more work on the character page, I felt, if you hadn't seen it, you might be able to use it there. Hope you enjoyed the trailer. I thought it was bad ass! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:09, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That’s good stuff. I’ll look into it.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 05:13, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Captain Marvel
You reverted my Captain Marvel edits. You don't have to do that. I didn't even remove the Shazam stuff ok. Just stop. Wizard2988 (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

"Undid revision 860619957 by Wizard2988 (talk) this edit has already been reverted once, please follow WP:BRD and discuss if you disagree." From you: TriiipleThreat (talk) 05:13, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Aquaman
Its the actual new teaeer image ...why the hell u r reverting my edit? Only to satisfy yourself? Beacuse the older one looks good?really? Kanishkani99 (talk) 18:03, 5 October 2018 (UTC)


 * So what if its new? The previous one shows that actual character, not just part of an arm and is in standard one sheet portrait format which fits better in the infobox.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:06, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Jude law in captain marvel
Well, there is only one source that says you're right. There are multiple sources who say you're not right. The role of Jude Law in captain marvel has not yet been disclosed and has been the center of rumours surrounding the movie. Scenarioschrijver20 (talk) 11:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The Hollywood Reporter verifies it as well. Also it’s not about being right or wrong, it’s about what is verifiable (WP:NOTTRUTH).—TriiipleThreat (talk) 11:47, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

How to add an image to Wikipedia page
Hi TriiipleThreat, I would like to know how can I add an image to a Wikipedia page Endocytosis (talk) 13:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:UPIMAGE.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:46, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Avengers: Infinity War reversions.
In an effort to be civil and listen to opposing views, I would like to discuss my contribution about the post credit scene. I feel that placing the content of the aforementioned scene in the plot of the movie proper as if that is where the scene takes place is both inaccurate and misleading. If someone watched the movie for the first time based on reading the plot, then they would wonder why the Nick Fury scene didn't occur along with the other disintegrations. Do we see Fury and Hill disintegrate while we see the others disintegrate? No. We see it later at the very end of the movie, which is why it should be included at the end of the plot summary. Please consider Godfather II as an example. The plot summary of that movie is presented the way it is presented in the film, not chronologically. The Hateful Eight also comes to mind as it contains a similar scene that chronologically takes place outside the main timeline. I don't see why this should be any different. We don't present summaries for flashback scenes of other movies before the main timeline. So why is Infinity War such an exception? I welcome a polite and civil rebuttal from you. Allindsey1978 (talk) 18:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking the time to open a dialogue. I went ahead moved this discussion to Talk:Avengers: Infinity War to give others the opportunity to weigh in.—-TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Much thanks. I am still new to these kind of discussions. How do I check to see others weighing in. Allindsey1978 (talk) 18:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Advice?
Regarding of what you said yesterday about starting to get consensus on the template talk, I already began one. But after 24 hours, no one has replied to my message. So I just wanted to know from someone with experience, how do you get others to start involved in the conversation. I don’t want it be forgotten and ignored. Pinky Rhino (talk) 20:59, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Discussion takes time, generally at least a week. That said, you can invite people to the discussion. A good place would be at WT:Comics. However, make sure the invitation is broad in its approach and is neutrally worded without taking sides as not to violate WP:CANVASSING.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. :) — Pinky Rhino (talk) 03:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Any particular reason
why you removed the still-live sources? and restored the one that is 100% dead? Hayholt (talk) 04:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The archive still works and look at your formatting.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 04:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok. I was talking about the first one. The one pointing to marvel.com. The one does not exist in the archive. Hayholt (talk) 04:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Check again, it’s archived through webcitation.org.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 04:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Avengers: Endgame
Hi, Trip. I've seen the marketing developments detailed in numerous film articles, though I admit it's possible that this was in the body, and not the Lead. Do you oppose including that info in the body? Are you planning on moving it? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Are you referring to your edit here? If so, yes, a film's marketing releases (ie trailers, posters, etc.) usually aren't mentioned in the lead. This info regarding the trailer was not in the article until your edit because of WP:FILMMARKETING, which states there needs to be some sort of analysis or critical commentary attached to the discussion of such marketing. A few edits after yours and Triiiple's undoing, I added the trailer info in with commentary, so it is now in the article. To the other points of your original edit, the title reveal in the lead does not need a specific date there, hence that undoing as well. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:42, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe)
Clearly, we have a difference of opinion about what constitutes readiness for an article to appear in mainspace. I have improved the article further since your move, along the lines requested. I would therefore appreciate if you would restore it to mainspace. If you still disagree, then I will find a previously uninvolved editor to make that call, or file a move request at the appropriate messageboard, which I'm sure you know will likely yield that result. Of course, you are also free to make the kind of improvements you think need to be made to the article. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:33, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I've started a discussion at Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

WikiLove - r
Awww thanks darling. Nominations are coming in constantly and I will try to update the page accordingly. Again, thank you so much for the award. I really appreciate it! - MsScorpioMoon (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Uploading new images over old images
User:NeoBatfreak has been uploading new images over old images, as seen on File:Scorpion (Mac Gargan).jpg and other images, rather than uploading entirely new images as separate files, so that the original image cannot be used anywhere else. What is the general feeling on this sort of activity? 73.168.15.161 (talk) 15:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Another example today being File:Blade (Marvel Comics).png. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:2902:BBA8:7EB0:5FA2 (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ (talk) 15:47, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Argento Surfer (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

Xmas

 * 2018 XMAS.pdf FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Avengers: Infinity War
Casliber 00:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)