Ask The Tropers

Adding tropes to a page for an earlier installment (X-Cellent) Print Comic

Bringing this one back to ATT as we've failed to reach an immediate consensus on forums - and we now have a disagreement on how to proceed until we do have a consensus.

Marvel's 2022 comic book miniseries X-Cellent was followed by / relaunched as 2023's miniseries The X-Cellent (Recycled Titles, especially character/team titles, are pretty standard for Marvel). That second series is still an ongoing work.

Over the last year or two the prevailing approach has been to create a new page (or, at the very least, a soft split) for comic relaunches of this nature, but StrixObscuro made the point that it may be close enough to the original to be handled as a single work, adding that "I see no reason why we should humor Marvel's cynical relaunches" ^note The 2023 series has the same creators and directly continues the same arc, and Marvel have directly referred to it as both a Sequel Series and "Season Two". It is treated as a different series on their own indexes (e.g. marvel.com and digital comic apps) and doesn't continue the first series' numbering.

As there was no consensus for an immediate merge, the agreement by default became to wait and see how this progresses, then revisit it when the work's complete, or at least less incomplete - e.g. is it going to get a third installment and how will it be handled for collected editions? We can then make a more informed decision to merge or not.

However, we still seem to have a difference of opinion on how we act in the interim - StrixObscuro has added examples for characters and events from the 2023 sequel to the 2022 series's page.

I moved them over to the 2023 page, not realising this had been a deliberate choice, on the basis that until/unless we merge, tropers wouldn't expect to hit spoilers (tagged or otherwise) or plot details for the new series on the previous installment's works page.

StrixObscuro then challenged that, saying that their view is that we should continue to update it with tropes from both series "until consensus finally and definitively decides that the two pages should remain split".

Can we get a steer on this aspect? I think we've dropped into entrenched positions on this one (and the Marvel cleanup thread's been pretty quiet), so I don't think we're going to resolve it ourselves.

For context, the original ATT is here, and the original cleanup thread discussion starts here.

Edited by Mrph1

Death's Head: seeking consensus to revert changes after fact check Print Comic

Two Marvel Comics pages, ComicBook.Deaths Head and Trivia.Deaths Head, have some 'detective work' statements/examples added by DaPolicia regarding the character's creation and copyright status. The same claims were added to The Other Wiki's page for the character.

These are largely updates to examples and text I previously edited or added, so I don't want to revert them myself (and start an edit war) without a consensus.

This is the core claim they've added:

The collected edition introduction directly states that "High Noon Tex" was created to secure copyright. There's a photo of the relevant statements here◊ for anyone who want to read it.

IANAL, but as I understand it UK copyright law is based on evidence of creation, not just widespread publication. Ashcan Copy logic allows the creation of a quick, sketchy version of the work or character to confirm ownership. The intro says it was "subsequently" published and I don't think a 1988 signature on the final/published work is a "Gotcha!" to show the creators are lying.

With that in mind I'd like to:

• Cut Pop Culture Urban Legends entirely
• Cut the "if Marvel hadn't done whatever they did" element from What Could Have Been, which also casts doubt on Marvel's claims.
• Cut the whole "A commonly-circulated story, corroborated by both Furman and artist Bryan Hitch and perpetuated by sources like This Very Wiki" section that was added to the ComicBook.Deaths Head intro, which casts doubt on the intro's original brief factual statement about the character's creation.

Even if there's more to the story than the official sources suggest, and Marvel isn't telling the complete and accurate history, I don't think it's our place to speculate in this way.

(If we get an official on-the-record statement from the company or creators that contradicts the original printed statements, that would be different)

Does that sound fair?

Edited by Mrph1

Possible edit war - Trivia/TheAmazingSpiderMan2022 Print Comic

Does this count as an edit war? Over on The Amazing Spider-Man (2022) - note that links contain spoilers.

This was the example before the recent leaks:

---

• Why Fandom Can't Have Nice Things: Zeb Wells has said that he'll be avoiding conventions due to the controversy expected to result from some the last issues of the run.

---

After the first of the recent Content Leaks was confirmed as genuine by Marvel, KingClark added an update to say that this must be because of a particular character death revealed by the leak.

(No source cited for that, and it's since been suggested that this isn't the end of the run, with Wells talking about his next year on the book)

I rephrased it a little with the edit reason "Still scope for more twists, and it hasn't happened yet" - as of today, the issue the leaks are from is still unpublished.

KingClark has now largely reverted that edit, returning it to a definite statement that it's because of the issue and this death.

Does that count as an edit war?

I'd like to revert it again, at least until the issue is published and/or we have a clear statement from Wells about what he meant by the original comment - but that would definitely be an edit war if done without consensus, so I'm holding fire.

Edited by Mrph1

No spoilers on a recap page... Print Comic

The rule that no part of a recap should be spoilered isn't valid just for episodes of a TV series, right?

Full albums of a comic-book series having their own recap pages are concerned too, I guess...

I'm asking because I noted that Asterix and the Griffin has lot of spoilered text.

Edited by StFan

Avoiding potential edit war - AssPull/ShockingSwerve example (Spider-Man 2022) Print Comic

Checking here before making any further edits, as I don't want to start an edit war:

As part of the wider cleanup on YMMV.Spider Man 2022 (complaining, Content Leak etc.), I cut two Ass Pull examples after seeking a second opinion about one on the AssPull cleanup thread. The thread's pretty quiet and there wasn't enough feedback there for a real consensus, but it seemed to confirm my doubts about the example.

I left an edit reason suggesting that if tropers did want to add the same examples back,"Please check with the cleanup thread before reinstating".

KaneChin89 (who's been active for years but only has a single page edit history for that time) has now added one of the examples back (with an exact copy/paste of the old wording) under Shocking Swerve, which is just a redirect to Ass Pull. There's no edit reason and no cleanup thread post.

(The example was originally added by PhyrexianAjani95, then heavily rewritten by nsommer659 - KaneChin89 hasn't edited it before)

Am I ok to delete it again? (I'll also link to this ATT on the cleanup thread, but - as before - not sure it'll get enough replies for a consensus there).

---

For context, this is the example:

• Shocking Swerve: The Reveal in #25 that Paul and MJ's kids are adoptive and just so happen to look like them. People immediately speculated that this was Marvel's attempt at an Author's Saving Throw because of the sheer amount of negative reception the plotline has been getting. The hint that her feelings for Paul are artificial as the result of a curse by Rabin also comes across as less something preplanned and more the writers trying to please the fans after all hate hoisted on the storyline.

Edited by Mrph1

Content leak issue - Spider-Man Print Comic

As mentioned here, here and here, we've had some issues with today's Spider-Man content leak, revealing a "shocking twist" in a comic to be released later this month. As the comic is due to be followed by a special Fallen Friend (final title embargoed) issue, the assumption was that it involved a major character death.

As per mod guidance from Synchronicity, I added a comment to some of the relevant pages warning tropers not to add leaked content.

Later today, hours after the initial leaked pictures made it onto the internet, Entertainment Weekly published it as an 'exclusive' scoop with clearer images. They also revealed the cover and final title of the Fallen Friend one-shot.

At this point there is no such announcement on marvel.com and it's unclear how 'official' that EW exclusive is, as Marvel had previously said all details were embargoed until end of month. There are certainly no Marvel quotes/comments within the EW article, and there's nothing about it on Marvel's own site yet.

However, Magi Mecha has now:

---

• Deleted the content leak comment from YMMV.The Amazing Spider Man 2022 and troped it there (spoiler tagging used), edit reason "Cat's out of the bag"
• Deleted the content leak comment from ComicBook.The Amazing Spider Man 2022, edit reason "Cat's out of the bag"
• Deleted the content leak comment from Trivia.The Amazing Spider Man 2022 and updated the Content Leak example to add details and a link, saying " Ultimately, Marvel, via Entertainment Weekly, revealed the shocking death to be [spoiler tagged name]". Edit reason is the EW link, with the character death confirmed in the URL.
• Edited the character's own Characters page (spoiler:Marvel Comics: Kamala Khan) to add the full title of the Fallen Friend special comic, spoiler tagged in a "Notable Comics" list above the line (which I think is in breach of spoiler policy?).

---

Where do we stand on this? It was clearly an unwanted/unofficial leak earlier today (with Marvel warning fans to avoid spoilers just a couple of hours ago), and although EW's scoop looked a lot more professional, there was nothing to directly say it was with the creator's permission.

Do we accept that the cat really is out of the bag, and let some of these edits stand? (I'm assuming the spoiler tagged title on the Characters page needs to go, either way)

UPDATE: Marvel themselves have finally given in and announced it, with an article on their site. Spoilers, of course. So it looks like the EW story was with their backing.

I guess some of the same questions remain, though - and some of the usual Creating a Work Page for an Upcoming Work considerations will apply to how we cover an unreleased instalment?

Edited by Mrph1

Hostess Fruit Pies Print Comic

Why was Hostess Fruit Pies cutlisted?

Image in Trivia page Print Comic

Trivia.Wonder Woman 1942 has an image on it, which no other Trivia page has. I'm pretty sure that Trivia pages aren't allowed to have images at all. Is it okay to remove it?

Indigogo Links Print Comic

I am doing pages for several works but it's available through Indigogo. Am I allowed to post Indigogo links?

Edited by Synchronicity

X-Cellent Print Comic

I discovered that we have two different pages for Marvel's X-Cellent series - X-Cellent and The X-Cellent (2023). Is it really necessary to have two different work pages, considering that one is just a continuation of the other?

Possible edit war - Characters/XMenSinister Print Comic

Earlier today Halogen added a Scam Religion example to the X-Men: Sinister page.

I amended it to add some spoiler tagging, as an event mentioned in the example is after the shared universe spoiler cut-off point listed for the page.

Halogen has now changed it back, deleting the spoiler tagging again, with no discussion or edit reason.

I don't know if that's because they don't view it as a spoiler, but I don't want to unilaterally change it back. Am I ok to revert it?

Edited by Mrph1

Moving appearances in various media section on Carnage pages? Print Comic

I was thinking of moving the "Carnage's appearances in various media:" section from the Marvel Comics: Carnage page to Carnage to make it closer to the Venom page.

Thoughts?

Superman = Almighty Janitor? Print Comic

We all know how powerful Superman is, but can he really be considered an Almighty Janitor? An Almighty Janitor is a character who nominally holds a low rank in his official job, but he is actually more powerful and influential than he initially appears.

In both the comics and the DC Animated Universe (which doesn't deviate that much from the main comics), Clark is a front-page columnist at a newspaper as famous as the New York Times and can afford a family apartment in downtown Metropolis, which means he probably earns a six-figure paycheck. Also, in Superman (2023), his wife becomes acting Editor-in-Chief after Perry White suffered a seizure.

So, what do you think?

Edited by MasterHero

Character page - alphabetical order? Print Comic

Just looking at X-Men: 2000s Members - it's a single list, it's not sorted by name, and (although it does cover a specific era) it's not sorted by date.

It doesn't seem to be 'core cast first' either.

This is a fairly common scenario for comic character pages for teams and rogues' galleries.

Is there some best practice guidance on how pages like this should be arranged?

(Will also flag this on the discussion page, but it's not specific to that one page - just using it as a case study)

Thanks!

Adding a Deconstructed Character Archetype page for Sonic the Hedgehog IDW Print Comic

So, I was wondering: would it be okay to add in a Deconstructed Character Archetype page for Sonic the Hedgehog (IDW)? It feels like the Deconstructed Character Archetypes with this series is growing each time a new character is introduced into the series and it seems like the many deconstructions done with this series is growing with each issue.

Transformers English/Japanese Names? Print Comic

I just saw the Mazinger Z Versus Transformers page and was confused when I saw that it used the Japanese names for the Transformers characters. I get that those were the names used in the manga's original Japanese, but is there a precedent about whether this page should use the English or Japanese names for the characters?

(Also, since this is a manga that didn't get adapted into an anime, I've put this in the "Print Comic" category. Let me know if that's correct or not.)

Star Trek: Debt of Honor reversions Print Comic

Need to ask permission to partially revert a couple of changes on Star Trek: Debt of Honor, both to avoid edit-warring (I made most of the page) and because mods did them.

𝕋𝕒𝕓𝕤 deleted this example:

• Mixed Ancestry:
  • As T'Cel explains, her mother, a full-blooded Romulan, was rescued from an escape pod as a child and mistaken for a Vulcan, as nobody in the Federation knew they were the same species yet. T'Cel, like Saavik, is half-Vulcan, but chose to rejoin her mother's people and embrace her Romulan half (whereas Saavik is shunned by some of T'Cel's crew for hewing to her Vulcan half).
  • T'Kir is as well. However while the book openly establishes that she's of mixed race, and T'Kir is keen to learn more about her father's people, the clues as to what the other half actually is are far more subtle. It's heavily implied that she's Kirk's daughter.

I think I can use Nonhuman Humanoid Hybrid for this.

Second, Septimus Heap changed "Part of Volume 2 of the Star Trek (DC Comics) series." to "The markup is: Part of..." while removing a wick to Needs Wiki Magic Love, which is just weird wording. I want to change that to "The comic is part of..."

Work page titles for arcs - should they include the series/franchise name? Print Comic

As I understand it, works pages should reflect the (or at least an) official title of the work in question.

In the ComicBook namespace, we have quite a few pages for arcs within a single series (or Bat Family Crossover events officially badged under a single series/character title) that only use the subtitle and not the series/character title.

So, for example -

• The Celestial Madonna Saga is an Avengers arc and the collected edition is titled Avengers: The Celestial Madonna Saga. There are no crossovers and no other titles involved in that arc.

• Days of Future Past is an X-Men story that's collected and sold as X-Men: Days of Future Past. Again, it's entirely from one series, Uncanny X-Men, not a crossover event.

• The Demon Bear Saga is a New Mutants arc and collected/sold as New Mutants: The Demon Bear Saga.

• God Loves, Man Kills... well, as you can see on the works page, the cover has X-Men as a prominent part of the title.

• Mutant Massacre is a Bat Family Crossover that covers three different X-books (plus odd issues of Thor and Daredevil, but is packaged and sold as X-Men: Mutant Massacre.

...you get the idea. I don't think there are many disambiguation concerns with the current names, if any. But we're inconsistent on this and many, many ComicBook pages have included the series title or character name as a prefix to the arc/event name.

It seems odd that we're editing down the names to remove the character/comic/franchise element when there are no character-limit issues, and when that's not the version that the publisher's officially using.

(It also increases the number of oddities in alphabetical indexes - e.g. tropers put One More Day and Go Down Swinging under S, because they know they're Spider-Man stories, but unless you're looking at the index page itself the structure and ** / *** bullets aren't visible)

So, subject to discussion on the relevant pages and elsewhere, is it worth a tidy up that attempts to move them?

(One note on this: due to the film of the same name, we'd probably need to add a year to X-Men: Days of Future Past to disambig if we do move it - but that's the exception)

Edited by Mrph1

X-Men - "Soft Serve" and Bob's Background Mutants Print Comic

An odd one -

Characters.X Men Krakoans includes three joke characters created by artist Bob Quinn (Slamazon, Soft Serve and Glowbrie). They were invented and named on his Twitter and then, when he was drawing X-comics (work-for-hire, so not creator owned), he drew them into the background of big crowd scenes - Slamazon and Glowbrie have had one panel each, Soft Serve's had two. None get dialogue or are identified in any way.

Their names and powers aren't canon or directly acknowledged by Marvel. Soft Serve, who apparently has the power to “poop ice cream” prompted an indirect reference from a writer in another X-book, mentioning a mutant girl with the power to create great ice cream, but that's it.

(I believe all of the art used on the character page is from Bob's Twitter, not the published comics. In the comics Soft Serve is practically a stick figure holding an ice cream cone who's only visible if you zoom in, for example)

So they're basically somewhere between very short fanfic and an in-joke. There Is no Such Thing as Notability, but I'm also a little wary of a page about Marvel Universe characters starting to accumulate fanon along with canon.

My instinct is to delete their character entries until/unless they actually, officially join the Marvel Universe - and to put something on the relevant Trivia pages to acknowledge Bob hiding them in crowd scenes as a joke. Does that sound appropriate?

(I think we've got a vaguely similar issue on Characters.Marvel Comics Captain Britain Corps, where some of the Captain Airstrip One tropes seem to be taken from fanfic in a 1980s UK fanzine, not from anything Marvel ever published - but the trope list makes no distinction. Still researching this one, though)

Thanks!

Edited by Mrph1

Use of [[Invoked]] tags to suppress trivia icons Print Comic

Looking at Characters.Deadpool Wade Wilson, there have been some recent changes to stop Word of God triggering the usual Trivia warning when used to support an example.

Am I right in thinking it shouldn't really be used that way on Characters / Works / Tropes pages?

(There are also indentation issues, but before I start trying to fix them, I thought I'd get a steer on this first)

From one Ship Tease example:

*** [[invoked]] WordOfGod states that the two seem very lonely, and admits that while the majority were rooting for Rogue and ComicBook/{{Gambit}}, he wanted to try something new and unexpected. Chapter 23's recap classifies Rogue and Deadpool's evening previous chapter as their first date.

That doesn't look like the usual use of 'invoked' as it's not in-universe Word of God by characters discussing a Show Within a Show, for example - but is it also permitted for suppressing the Trivia tag when fleshing out an example that doesn't solely rely on it?

My assumption is no, but...?

Thanks!

Edited by Mrph1