Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Marvel Comics work group

Troubling articles
I've been running through articles and merging to List of minor DC Comics characters or List of minor Marvel Comics characters as appropriate - plot only, no notability actually displayed. But I've been running into plot only articles that merging doesn't seem appropriate because: The articles I've run across so far include:
 * Extremely long content;
 * Large IOM sections;
 * Covers a strip or series as well as a character;
 * Covers a character that is/was a series focus; and
 * Should be easy to show notability in 3rd party sources.


 * Gorilla-Man
 * M-11 (comics)
 * Marvel Boy (Robert Grayson)
 * Namora


 * Phalanx (comics)
 * Venus (Marvel Comics)
 * Jimmy Woo

Some of these wouldn't move to the lists I've indicated, but all of them need a solid look at improvement.

(I'm cross posting this to some of the workgroups as well.)

- J Greb (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Marvel Absurd
Need some feedback on Marvel Absurd. I made this article a fair number of years ago on the assumption that I or others would be able to come up with something to expand on the topic. That has not happened nor does it look like it's going to happen. Additionally, clicking on edit or history redirects me to the edit/history pages for Marvel Next. If no solutions can be found for this or if the article is beyond fixing I'm thinking AfD might be a good way to go. -- Jelly Soup (talk) 05:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Phineas and Ferb: Mission Marvel
I started to create a page on the upcoming crossover episode of Phineas and Ferb at User:JDDJS/Phineas and Ferb: Mission Marvel, which I will make into a full article once there is enough content. Considering that this is the first Disney/Marvel crossover, I feel that this page could expand fast. Please help contribute to it. JDDJS (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Are Transformers characters Marvel Comics characters?
Please consider joining the discussion as to whether certain Transformers characters should be included in. The discussion can be found here. Fortdj33 (talk) 15:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Marvel RPG supplements
Someone has been creating articles for each entry on List of Marvel RPG supplements. I question whether these supplements are notable enough to warrant a separate article for each of them. Please join the discussion at Talk:Concrete Jungle (supplement). Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 16:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Guillotine character
The new character Guillotine (comics) has a page and requires attention. I thought she would be notable due to her being Marvel's first character to debut in a mobile game (Contest of Champions). Please consider working on it. Arnabdas (talk) 18:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Transformers cleanup
Organization of articles related to Transformers apparently could use some work. If this is not sorted out, it is likely that material will be piece-meal deleted by AfD participants over time. This is being discussed at Articles for deletion/Bug Bite (Transformers). Please contribute your ideas to this discussion. ~Kvng (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Comic Book Templates Proposal
Can we make it universal that the founding members get their own section on a template and then below the rest of the members appear? Also can we add a section denoting all of the subsequent writers and artists after the creatorsin their own section below? Does that make sense? What do you guys think? Fluffyroll11 (talk) 00:41, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Cleanup needed in Carol Danvers
One long sentence in the Carol Danvers article, incorporating several chunks of plot, is a largely incomprehensible mess and needs cleaning up (preferably into two or three shorter, simpler sentences) by someone who knows the story. Please see --Thnidu (talk) 23:34, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

should character articles have templates for every single support character?
I notice a guy adding Nick Fury template to Wolverine(under the Related topics bit), Punisher, and others. Punisher has Daredevil's template also. Anyway, how many templates are appropriate for each character? The Punisher had his own comic series, multiple ones at a time sometimes, for decades now. How many of those had him dealing with Daredevil? Most didn't have Nick Fury in them either. He's been in a lot of Spider-Man comics also over the years. Anyway, for characters who never had their own comic book, and only exist as support for one character, such as Wolverine has Yukio (comics) who I don't believe appears anywhere without him, it makes sense to have the Wolverine template in her article. For others though, they have teamed up with everyone multiple times, so the list would be ridiculously long.  D r e a m Focus  03:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I added them because I thought it made sense since they have interacted a lot. What counts as a supporting character can be a but tricky, if you disagree with them being that we can just discuss it. Nick Fury for example was a supporting character in the Punisher Max series that ran for a long time and the only other Marvel character to appear in it for years, to me feelt like it makes sense for him to be concidered a supporting character to the Punisher, I understand if some would disagree though.
 * Also, please if you're going to mention me do so with my usename so that I recive a notification.★Trekker (talk) 12:11, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Others also add in templates of characters, not just you. That's the first time I noticed it.  I was wondering if a rule was established.   D r e a m Focus  12:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't know. It seems a little random sometimes but an important aspect of templates are that they're supposed to be bidirectional, which as far as I can see the Wolverine, Nick Fury and Punsiher articles are.★Trekker (talk) 13:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion for the Template:Marvelwiki
Greetings and felicitations. Since there is very little activity at Template:Marvelwiki or its talk page, I thought I bring up this issue here. External links states

"12. Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. Mirrors or forks of Wikipedia should not be linked."

However, the Marvel Universe Wiki is an official organ of Marvel, and is therefore recommended as a link. Since there is currently no Wikipedia article about this wiki, I recommend that the template be changed to output "X at the official Marvel Universe Wiki". What do you think? —DocWatson42 (talk) 03:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Do we know if the content is created by Marvel Comics employees, or is it user-generated like other wikis? If that is verifiable, then I would think that makes all the difference as to whether it is an RS. BOZ (talk) 05:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I tried citing it once, it was removed because it is was wiki. No idea if it's run by employees or not.★Trekker (talk) 12:17, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This implies that the content is user-generated. Perhaps instead a notation in the template that the wiki is an official site, but the content is user-generated, and is thus not suitable for Wikipedia citations? —DocWatson42 (talk) 12:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The domain is owned by Marvel but the content is user-generated. Besides I don't think we normally link to other wikis.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, Star Wars–related articles routinely link to Wookieepedia ("substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors"?). —DocWatson42 (talk) 03:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ★Trekker, this is not for citing but for external links. It is fan edited, but with the lack of approvers (may have been staff or trusted volunteers) they closed it down awhile back last I knew. Spshu (talk) 21:03, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Marvel Entertainment FF rights
There is a discussion on Marvel Entertainment talk page on whether or not Fox has FF all movie rights or does Constanin Films have production rights. Spshu (talk) 21:03, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Infinity_Gems#Split_for_MCU
Talk:Infinity_Gems a discussion that people here might be interested in. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Notice of article deletion - List of box office records set by Avengers: Infinity War
Please note that List of box office records set by Avengers: Infinity War has been nominated for deletion. Users are welcome to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of box office records set by Avengers: Infinity War. Tutelary (talk) 04:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Multiple articles stating Ronin will appear in Avengers: Endgame
The above claim has been made on the Avengers: Endgame and Ronin pages. The latter cites Express. However, this article also wrongly claims that Steve Rogers was going to be named Nomad, which we know did not happen in Infinity War... and as Rush922 has noted in edit summaries, the claim about Barton is not yet backed up by other sources. So, should we get rid of this claim across the various articles? Airbornemihir (talk) 18:56, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Airbornemihir, you might have better luck addressing this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics instead. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:416C:1D5E:7659:9576 (talk) 20:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅, thanks! Airbornemihir (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * this is just an issue at the Ronin page, as the Endgame article does not make this claim. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I should clarify. I noticed some amount of discussion on this claim through edit summaries so I thought it wouldn't be a bad idea to clear this up on a talk page, and of course I tried to choose a talk page of interest for editors of both articles. Airbornemihir (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, so to clarify what was happening at Endgame, we have added a source that acknowledges the visual similarities to Ronin in the character's new costume, but we don't say that he will use that name since we don't know that yet. claimed that the source we did use had violated WP:OR, but OR applies to Wikipedia editors not third-party sources, and since that user replaced the original source with a link to the trailer and their own personal interpretation of said trailer (a clear OR violation) I have just restored the information to how it was before. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Fine, but I just want to know how my edit is considered OR. All I did was state what was in the trailer- there was no 'intrepetation,' I was just stating bare-minimum facts.  "Barton has an alternate suit in the film, along with a sword-like weapon."  Then I sourced the trailer- the exact point in the trailer where he makes an appearance.  I didn't draw any separate conclusions from it, or assume anything- I literally just took it at face value. I mean, that's as basic as it gets without elaborating further.  You're basically saying that we're not allowed to comment at all on a sourced video, correct? If you're saying its OR just because a third party didn't say it, well they are basically doing the same thing we are anyway - they don't have any further evidence than we do, which is the trailer itself.  Let me ask you- if you were to source the trailer directly yourself, how would you make a comment on it without it being considered OR?  Because I think common sense would show that it's a fine line. Rush922(talk) 07:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I will back up by assertion with this, as is written on the WP:OR page itself: "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source." And that is exactly what I did - all I said was he HAS a suit and HAS a new weapon. Just a basic description of facts that anyone with eyes can see, using common sense, in the trailer. Rush922(talk) 08:11, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't have a strong opinion on the OR issue. I'm inclined to let adamstom97 and you come to a consensus, but I do think both the articles mentioned should say the same thing once that consensus is found. To state the obvious, as long as they differ, editors will see one and want to change the other. Thanks! Airbornemihir (talk) 13:15, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's OR because the trailer does not say that it is "an alternate suit", you just know it is based on your own knowledge of the character from other films. Regardless, there is no OR issue with the other source so it is fine to use that. I am less certain about how this should be presented at the Ronin page, as I agree that it should line up with the Endgame page, but I don't know if it is noteworthy enough to state that he appears to use a similar-looking suit. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Split articles on phases for MCU
Please see and participate in Talk:List_of_Marvel_Cinematic_Universe_films. I want to make sure this is what the consensus of editors want as there are drafts pending approval of this. I have no idea if this will imply an article split or introducing new material. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:59, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Banned Participants
It has come to my notice that some of our participants have been blocked and even worse, some banned, i was wondering is it right for a different editor to exclude them from our list of participants in order to make mailings easier? Celestina007 (talk) 12:26, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If they are indefinitely banned, then I don't see any reason why they can't be removed? BOZ (talk) 16:08, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Rfc on Talk:Guardians of the Galaxy (film)
Please comment on whether the original creators of the team (Arnold Drake, Gene Colan) should be cited/credited in the infobox of the film. Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 7:08 am, Today (UTC+5.5)

Marvel Cinematic Universe GA Reassessment
Marvel Cinematic Universe, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 04:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Splitting discussion for Doctor Octopus


An article that been involved with ( Doctor Octopus ) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Otto Octavius (film character)). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. AngusW🐶🐶F ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Ultimates
I want to report here this discussion. Redjedi23 (talk) 08:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Can someone fix the main page?
under participents, it says "as of 2021 there are 39 members", theres more now, can someone fix it? Babysharkboss2 (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:SOFIXIT. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * i tried,and i think its a template, idk how to change templates. Babysharkboss2 (talk) 17:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Comics/Marvel Comics work group/Members. It's a subpage. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

HELLOOO!!!
I have made a topicon for everyone who is a member of here!! (I removed a { from it, tho.) Feel free to use it!!

{Top icon | imagename = Marvel Logo.svg | wikilink = Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Marvel Comics work group | description = This user is a member of the Marvel Comics Wikiproject | id = 232378 }} Babysharkboss2 (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

How Do You Join The Group?
I'm a Marvel fan I just wanna join the group, but how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merv Mat (talk • contribs) 18:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Morbius, the Living Vampire
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Morbius, the Living Vampire that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 06:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Black Widow (Yelena Belova)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Black Widow (Yelena Belova) that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)