Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) Cleanup

Made a thorough cleanup pass through the C-F folder.

So ~Dragon Ranger has taken it upon themselves to re-add Captain Marvel 2 and Black Panther 2 to the list. They've left links to Marvel's web site in a comment-hidden note.

The links appear legit, but outdated, particularly for Black Panther 2, since the post on Marvel's web site is dated in April, months before Chadwick Boseman's death. I feel pretty comfortable kicking that one, at least, out as invalid.

While there seems to be general consensus that cast and production crew shouldn't be listed, we still haven't reached a real consensus on what an MCU work needs in order to be added to the Franchise page. Suggested options include:

• An officially-announced title and director
• An officially-announced title and release date
• For the work to meet the criteria for getting a work page per Creating a Work Page for an Upcoming Work

I still favor the "title and release date" criteria. I think the tropability criteria are a little restrictive for these purposes. I get the argument for director, but I think that's a little murkier than release date; directorial attachment is the subject of much rumor and speculation and could cause confusion, whereas it's hard to mistake a rumored release date for an official one.

That said, I also realized another potential wrinkle: what counts as a "title"? "Captain Marvel 2" and "Black Panther 2" are almost certainly working titles, considering that Marvel has largely gone the "[Series Title]: [Work Subtitle]" route with non-Iron Man sequels. The only other numbered sequel in the franchise is Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and even that adds the "Volume" modifier into the mix.

I think we can go with officially-announced title plus officially-confirmed director and/or release date. The officialness of the announcement should take priority, and we can afford to be more lenient with the listing of titles once we purge extraneous information like castings. I also agree that having Creating a Work Page for an Upcoming Work is far too stringent, especially with the epidemic making it hard to get off the ground for a lot of longstanding projects.

For the working titles we can just go with something like "Untitled Captain Marvel sequel", since "Captain Marvel 2" is still a proper title.

Edited by AlleyOop on Sep 30th 2020 at 6:06:48 AM

I'm not sure I'm following you. Are you in favor of requiring a title or not? Because "untitled Captain Marvel sequel" is not a title.

As I see it, our options are,

• Not actually requiring a title
• Accepting working titles as fulfilling the title requirement
• Accepting only apparently-final titles

I'm in favor of the third, personally.

We're accepting officially announced works, right? Sometimes like with the Taika Waititi Thor movies we have the title right off the bat, but a lot of the time we don't find that out until fairly deep into development, even though we've already known for a while about the existence and progress on the work. Thus I'm going with accepting working titles for now.

Edited by AlleyOop on Sep 30th 2020 at 6:17:52 AM

I added Panther and Marvel because there was an official announcement of dates and there was not any announcement changing them, official or unofficial.

ImmiThrax said in the edit reason that there was no mention of either film in the Sept. 23 date shuffle announcement, but that announcement didn't say anything about Thor 4 or Dr. Strange 2 either, to name two. It doesn't mean they're canceled, it just means the dates haven't changed. I'm also not inclined to take their absence from Marvel.com/movies as definitive evidence of a change either, given that we're lacking a formal announcement for one; that could just be because they're two years out/Phase 5 and not 4/etc. or some other reason as opposed to losing a release date.

By my understanding of what Disney/Marvel has actually said, the current dates still hold for the time being, and any changes are speculation until they say otherwise.

If nothing else, the films should be listed in the "undated" section instead of cut entirely.

We're editing at cross-purposes, so I think we really need that policy clarification or a vote.

Cleaned out and migrated the S-Z section of the page.

Since the general sentiment in this thread is running against including too much "breaking news" on upcoming MCU films, I wonder if I might get opinions on the last three paragraphs on Spider-Man: Far From Home's work description:

I question the appropriateness of giving nearly as much space to inside-baseball corporate dealings and casting / production news about non-tropeable upcoming works as to the work the page is ostensibly about. It's the sort of thing that's liable to become outdated, and indeed has already been the subject of more than a bit of serial-editing.

Case in point about this sort of thing getting outdated, I also question the paragraph above these:

The Blu-Ray has been out for a year; what's with the future tense? Is the short on it or not?

Edited by HighCrate on Oct 1st 2020 at 3:24:47 AM

I'm on the fence about sequel status information in general, but at least cut the line about Jamie Foxx for being a rumor.

I don't mind mentioning the planned sequel, but I think a single line— something like "a sequel is planned for release in late 2021"— is as much space as we need to give it. Three paragraphs is excessive.

Pretty much anything that has entire paragraphs of information needs to have it trimmed down to just a bunch of names and dates, and at most a sentence or two for things like Black Panther 2 where something especially unusual is going on.

Small bump, as pointed out by Anddrix, the Franchise/ page is now showing the "too long" warning.

I really don't understand why this is so difficult but:

• A work should have a title before it's listed on the page. Even sequels.
• If a sequel/prequel/companion work doesn't have a title yet, then a line saying "sequel has been confirmed with X directing" is enough. No more information is required at this stage.
• Listing the entire production crew on this page is worthless and should be saved for when the work actually gets a page.

Yes, it should.

I can't help you on what constitutes a viable source given how many people are involved in all this mumbo-jumbo with I Ps, studios, original comic writers and producers but you should certainly not overwrite official announcements if ''no other official statement has been made to overturn the previous one."

You may proceed with my instructions.

So a while back I deleted three long paragraph's worth of inside-baseball production news about the untitled upcoming MCU Spider-Man film from Spider-Man: Far From Home and replaced it with a simple, "A sequel is planned for release in late 2021."

Since then, troper ~King Clark has been steadily adding more and more details about casting, contracts, etc. It's not nearly as lengthy as it was, but it's ballooned back into a paragraph.

As thread consensus seems to be running toward a "less is more" approach to such things, I think cutting his additions and reverting it back to a single line would be appropriate, but I wanted to bring the matter here for input first lest it become an Edit War.

Went and cleaned up the G-R section, and that seems to have brought the page back down from its too-large state. I do suggest looking over through Anddrix's whopping additions to see if they can't be significantly scaled down or put onto their own page(s).

Maybe we can ask about it on the too long page repair thread?

Edited by gjjones on Oct 14th 2020 at 9:26:13 AM

As three days have gone by with no response to the contrary, I am deleting ~King Clark's additions to Far From Home.

So... I'm a relatively new "troper." Been reading for a few years, figured it's about time I join in. Here I go.

Is Helstrom being considered part of the MCU still? The showrunner said it wasn't around the day of the release, and while I was willing to ignore that as long as the Marvel wiki still listed it, they just put it as Earth-TRN 836. Not the MCU, if you're not as much of a nerd as I am.

Point is, I've been adding a few Helstrom related things to the character pages for the past few days. Should I get rid of those? I'm perfectly willing to. Someone please let me know.

Apparently Anddrix's "Adaptational" additions to the A section were so enormously long that the A-B section had to be divided into their own page, and even that was not enough to avoid triggering the "too long" disclaimer and thus parts of the page had to get split off into Marvel Cinematic Universe and Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Can someone help me look through the A page to make sure it's not chock-full of shoehorns? I took a quick look and I saw a few tropes that only had two examples, meaning they would not qualify for inclusion on the MCU page by this thread's standards.

Going to call in ~Anddrix directly because they keep posting examples that are either wall-of-text or only have two entries when it's possible that they can be consolidated into something more example or better-elaborated on individual work pages.

You need to link to their troper page for the ping to work.

With the big info drop this past week, the page has been collecting cast and crew info again. Do we want to recommit to a "no casting" rule?

Anddrix has been going on another spree of adding big long trope entries to the pages again today. I suspect they're just copy-pasting entries from trope pages wholesale and not really giving thought to whether they're tropes that really do apply to the franchise as a whole, or trying to talk about them in a franchise context instead of individual films. And, apparently, they never showed up when AlleyOop tried calling them here last winter. What should we do?

I guess try to call them in again?

~Anddrix