Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force

Midnight Sons - restart discussion

Given Oscar Isaac made some comments about this, wanted to restart the discussion I started back here about trying to get a user-space draft going about this material. The discussion/implementation feel naturally by the wayside, so wanted to rebump the thought to see if we can still get something happening. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:56, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Based on those comments, that adds further fuel to the fire in regards to Sneider's report from earlier this year. With that in mind, I think we now have enough to go off of to warrant the basis of a draft being started. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 17:01, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree. I still am unsure if the draft space is the best, because we generally don't create drafts for projects that aren't formally discussed by creatives or Marvel Studios, so a user sandbox may be best. Unless we think Isaac talking about it justifies it becoming a draft. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:32, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Since he could be talking about a past iteration that isn't currently in development, I think a sandbox is best. We really shouldn't be creating new drafts for projects that might not actually be happening. If it turns out that there is a version in development and things pick up, we could move from userspace to draftspace. Alternatively, I was wondering what the rules are about creating pages under "Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force/" for content that is speculative and not ready for a draft, if we don't want to use individual sandboxes for those. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:07, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I suppose doing work in a sandbox or subpage makes sense for now, until we get a more clear idea whether this is something that will actually eventuate. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:47, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Do we have any reliable sources we can use other than the reports from Perez and Sneider at Development of Blade (upcoming film) plus the new interview with Isaac? If that is what we have to work with, we could add that to List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films for now and then expand to a sandbox or draft if something more concrete comes out. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:56, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Rotten Tomatoes average rating

For those who didn't see it, Rotten Tomatoes has added back the average rating feature and has clarified that it is an "Average of Rated Reviews". I personally think this is great, that we have the rating back visible on the site and that we have clarity on what it means. We can now add back the average rating to any articles that are missing it, mostly the projects that have been released since the rating disappeared from the RT website. I think we should also consider whether there should be a standard approach to wording across the MCU articles, as some of the older articles are still using wording that isn't ideal. I prefer the direction we have gone more recently, where we clarify that the Tomatometer score is the percentage of positive reviews rather than just calling it an "approval score" or something like that. Similarly we should probably use the wording "average of rated reviews" to align with the website and not suggest that it is an average rating for all the reviews listed. Any thoughts or concerns? - adamstom97 (talk) 18:24, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:MCUTVCAST outdated

While this statement ("Unlike conventional television series, the series do not clearly differentiate series regulars, guest stars (regular or "special"), and co-stars. Instead, each episode has one cast list during the credits as well as a main on-end title sequence that gives billing to the series' main actors.") in WP:MCUTVCAST might've been true at the time, it's no longer true for recent TV shows.

For example, the first season of Wonder Man and the second season of Daredevil: Born Again both follow a close-to-traditional credit structure that clearly differentiates the cast: series regulars and/or featured actors followed by any Special Guest Star (which are credited as such) in the title sequence, with an optional "Guest Starring" end credits section as soon as the episode ends, and a "Cast" section listing all of the episode's cast after that. The first season of Born Again also followed a fairly similar credit structure to this. Skeetacus25 (talk) 09:30, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this section needs an update for the post-October 2023 restructure approach and has been in the back of my mind to do so. However, seeing as Born Again is the only series so far to use "Guest star" credit at the end, it's not exactly a pattern yet that we can follow. VisionQuest in theory should also follow this approach as it was wholly created post creative restructure. I'm happy to put new wording in here to cover Born Again and hope it will apply for VisionQuest and any new series developed going forward. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Based on credits

@Skeetacus25: I have reverted your widespread, unsourced changes to the MCU film "based on" credits. Please have a centralised discussion here about your concerns so we can come up with an approach that we all agree on. Your changes were WP:OR and WP:SYNTH as you were guessing which comic titles to include, those are not in the credits like you said. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:41, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Why? I don't see anything on that specifies that |based_on param needs to mention a character. The contents of the infobox should ideally be taken from the film. Skeetacus25 (talk) 19:52, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

That is obviously incorrect, to make an unnecessary piped link to [[character name|Marvel Comic Book]]. It's an WP:EASTEREGG link that is unclear to the general reader. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:07, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Then please explain how it was determined that The Incredible Hulk (film), for example, is based on the character of Hulk when the film itself credits that it's based on an unspecified Marvel comic book by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko? ("Based on the Marvel Comic Book by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby.") Certainly not through WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, correct? Skeetacus25 (talk) 20:51, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

But you didn't take the wording directly from the film, you added in specific comic book titles that are not mentioned in the credits and did not provide a reliable source to support the changes. You assumed which titles might by referred to by the credits, which is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:31, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

My subsequent edits used exactly what was stated on-screen. Linking to a character that the movie does not state it's based on is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Skeetacus25 (talk) 20:53, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Your subsequent edits should not have happened, you were reverted by multiple editors and asked to have a discussion about the changes. On Wikipedia, we stop and come to a consensus, we do not continue to make controversial edits. You don't get to do whatever you want, we are a community here and we work together to come to solutions. It does not matter that you think you are correct, you are being disruptive and have been warned multiple times to stop. I never said that the current wording of the "based on" credits is correct or needs to be kept, all I did is revert undiscussed widespread changes that were not supported by the films or by sources, and asked you to have a discussion about it here. I am happy to figure out the best way forward, but that can't happen if you continue to ignore the warnings at your talk page and edit war across multiple articles. Stop making your edits and wait until this discussion comes to a consensus. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

That is reverse logic, Skeetacus. You think the general reader is somehow confounded when Iron Man 2 is based upon the character Iron Man? I'm already tired of arguing this, I feel like you wilfully claim you WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT. Now you've resorted to adding hidden comments in the articles, why? Just to make your point? You know it doesn't show up. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 21:06, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

No, I don't think they're confused. Iron Man 2 is very obviously based on the character of Iron Man, but no such "Based on" credit exists in the movie; the movie itself says it's based on an unspecified Marvel comic book by Stan Lee, Don Heck, Larry Lieber, and Jack Kirby (in that order).

As the information in the infobox is supposed to be based on the film's credits, how exactly was it determined that the unspecified comic book credited in the film is a specific character? Because that's just plain incorrect.

I added it as hidden text so there is a record of the exact "Based on" credit that is given on-screen. Skeetacus25 (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I'm correct. I think the movie itself is correct. Sure, linking to a specific comic book might've been WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, but linking to a character when the movie says it's based on an unspecified comic book is also WP:OP and WP:SYNTH.widespread changes that were not supported by the films You see, that is precisely why I added the verbatim Based on credit that is shown on-screen as hidden text. Skeetacus25 (talk) 21:21, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

You are insisting on making changes feeling that they are justified, but that isn't the point. Whether you think you are making the correct changes or not is irrelevant, you were asked to stop and discuss, end of story. Until you can accept that and stop edit warring, we can't continue this discussion about how to handle these credits. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

|based_on parameter

The |based_on parameter for essentially all of the films in the Infinity Saga (with the exception of Captain Marvel), Eternals in Phase Four, and The Fantastic Four: First Steps in Phase Six is incorrect. Per the end credits, the films are always based on "the Marvel Comic Book by," "the Marvel Comic by," "the Marvel Comics by," "the Marvel Comics" (no authorship), or in the case of Ant-Man (film), "the Comics by." They have never been based on a character. There is no formal guidance regarding the use of the |based_on param, only a miscellaneous one stating it should only list characters and creators present in the project's end credits.

In Iron Man, for example, "Based on the Marvel Comic Book by Stan Lee, Don Heck, Larry Lieber, Jack Kirby" is present in the end credits but no characters are present. In Eternals, "Based on the Marvel Comics by Jack Kirby" is present but also present are two completely different characters (Eros and Pip created by Jim Starlin).

Why does Iron Man link to the character in the parameter when no such character is present in the end credits, while Eternals links to the characters when different characters, created by a different creator, are present in the end credits (as "Character created by Creator")? If the parameter is using the on-screen "Based on" credit, how was it determined that it should link to a character and how was it determined which character to link to? Skeetacus25 (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

We actually did have an extensive discussion about this at Talk:The Avengers (2012 film)/Archive 6#Based on which led to changes to the wording in the lead and some infoboxes, but the consensus was to still mention the specific character rather than any given comic book title. Pings for all involved in that discussion: @Facu-el Millo, IronManCap, Favre1fan93, TriiipleThreat, Emir of Wikipedia, Starforce13, IAmNMFlores, and InfiniteNexus. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:47, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

I definitely don't think we should be coming to our own determination on what comic books they are referring to. Creator credits for specific individual characters are not based on credits and should not be used in the parameter or lead. The Superman and Batman film articles have been handling it this way for years. I know for a while these simply put "Marvel Comics" for the parameter, and we should stick to that in the infobox while remaining cognizant with how it is interpreted in the lead. It would border WP:OR to determine that the comic book titles the characters originally debuted in are the Marvel Comics that these films are based on, which can especially get confusing for some readers when they are the multi-purpose comic titles. The credit for Eternals I believe is correct, though probably could be changed to The Eternals given that is the actual comic title and cannot be reasonably doubted, same for Fantastic Four which should probably be for Fantastic Four, not the team itself. I think we should list each based on credit as derived from the films themselves in hidden notes after the text for ease of verification, and the task force guideline should be expanded upon to specify these conditions, especially considering it has been years since that was established. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 16:28, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

We don't determine that the comic book titles the characters originally debuted in are the Marvel Comics that these films are based on, we are saying they're based on the characters themselves, which were originally created by the authors mentioned. If you're not okay with the other credits, why do you think the credits for Eternals and Fantastic Four are correct? Wouldn't those be WP:OR as well? I think that the previous discussion referred to by link above was pretty exhaustive. Examples were brought up of other articles where which work to put on the |based on= parameter was concluded from the authors named in the credits, where the credits didn't list the title because it was basically redundant with the title of the film itself. This doesn't seem that different to me. I think editors coming against this consensus should read that discussion in full before continuing (not implying those already opposed haven't already read it, just that the arguments laid there should be acknowledged). —El Millo (talk) 04:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

In my sandbox I've retrieved the texts from the credits of all films/shows (and what we, at the time, chose to put on the |based on= parameter) up to The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, and I've added Eternals and The Fantastic Four: First Steps for the purpose of this renewed discussion. Everyone is welcome to fill it with the rest of the films/shows as they see fit. —El Millo (talk) 04:40, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Do you think it is a fair summary of the previous discussion to say: the credits generally say "Based on the Marvel Comic Book", "Based on the Marvel Comic", "Based on the Marvel Comics" etc. but then they list the creators of the title character(s), and we interpreted that as meaning "Based on [title character]". And that is the part that Skeetacus25 is taking issue with based on a literal ready of the credits, which don't mention the specific character by name. Also note that Skeetacus25 and Favre1fan93 did change the based_on credits of the Spider-Man films already. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:04, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

What was the reasoning behind changing it for Spider-Man films? —El Millo (talk) 16:46, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

My two cents: it is unnecessary and incorrect to make a piped link like "based upon the [[character name or comic book title|Marvel Comic Book]]", it's a vague and imprecise WP:EASTEREGG link. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 17:06, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

No one seems to be suggesting that, which would be the same but worse for everyone regardless of their point of view. That would be just as much WP:OR as having the name be visible for those opposed. The suggestions are either just Marvel Comics by (author) without linking to any character, (Character) by (author), or (Comic) by (author). No piping, no WP:EASTEREGG. —El Millo (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm realizing now my changes on the Spider-Man pages were incorrect. I had forgotten about the reasoning established in the past, and they should go back to just being "Spider-Man" not "The Amazing Spider-Man". I'm happy to restore those, or waiting until this discussion has ended. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93:, I think you can go ahead and change that back, it doesn't seem this discussion will be progressing fast enough for us to be waiting for it. —El Millo (talk) 14:06, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Done. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:37, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Superhero names?

I started a discussion on the Template page for something:

Template talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe#Superhero names? NarutoSan6000 (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Incorrect use of infobox producer parameter in TV animation

The infoboxes of I Am Groot, X-Men '97, Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Eyes of Wakanda, and Marvel Zombies currently list "Producer" credits in the parameter that is reserved for the line producer who receives a "Produced by" (or the equivalent for animation). TV animation is not listed as an exception in the template documentation and "Producer" credits are not the equivalent of "Produced by" in animation, nor are "Producer" credits listed as part of the parameter in the various articles for live-action TV shows I've encountered. There is a discussion about the misuse of the parameter to list all "Producer" credits but the its use does not appear to have changed; the template documentation still states the parameter is reserved for the line producer who receives a "Produced by" (or the equivalent for animation). Please explain why these articles are actively going against template documentation and any changes to fix these misuses are being reverted. Skeetacus25 (talk) 18:34, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Taking What If...? as an example, Carrie Wassenaar, Danielle Costa, Dana Vasquez-Eberhardt, and Alex Scharf are all correctly in this parameter. The point of the parameter is not to feature the writing equivalent of the "producer" credit. As the credits listed in the show, these folks are all using our infobox parameter. And when you originally started incorrectly removing them, I added the documentation line "or the equivalent for animation" to cover cases such as these. This is a not an issue of incorrect parameter use. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I forgot about What If...? but what you claim is a misrepresentation of the template documentation. The explanation says The producer(s) of the show. This generally should be for the series' line producer, who receives "Produced by" credit, or the equivalent for animation. with a second stipulation regarding writer-producers: and should not be used for low-level writers on the series' writing staff who receive credits such as "producer", "co-producer", or "supervising producer". I'm not entirely sure what the "Produced by" credit equivalent for animation is (maybe animation producer?), but it certainly isn't "Producer" and animation is not mentioned as an exemption to the parameter's normal usage.

If none of the people currently added to the parameter in any of those series are the line producer that received a "Produced by" credit, or the equivalent for animation, that means the parameter is, in fact, being misused by WP:MCU. If you wish to give your opinion about what the parameter is meant for, feel free to contribute to the discussion I linked above but, as it currently stands, WP:MCU is actively and willingly going against template documentation and reverting attempts to correct this misuse. Skeetacus25 (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

And when you originally started incorrectly removing them, I added the documentation line "or the equivalent for animation" to cover cases such as these. So that's why I never saw animation mentioned there before... You just admitted to unilaterally changing the documentation without any consensus and ignoring the existing discussion regarding a potential change in the parameter (that you're a part of, mind you) just so you could be right? That's a bad look... Skeetacus25 (talk) 22:44, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Additionally, just looking at LinkedIn profiles for Marvel Studios' Wassenaar, Costa, and Vasquez-Eberhardt, they are either producers (Wassenaar) or VPs (Costa and Vasquez-Eberhardt) at the company, both roles in animation that, per each series' credits, would be allowed in this parameter. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:27, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

WT:TV and Template talk:Infobox television have been notified of this discussion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:39, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Do we know this is incorrect? Sounds like you have just decided it is wrong without anything actually saying that. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

At the time I fixed the misuses, the documentation stated The producer(s) of the show. This generally should be for the series' line producer, who receives "Produced by" credit, and should not be used for low-level writers on the series' writing staff who receive credits such as "producer", "co-producer", or "supervising producer". See the Producers Guild of America guide to television credits for more information. Clearly the intent is that if there's no "Produced by" credit, the parameter should be empty.

After my edits, Favre1fan93 unilaterally and without any discussion updated the documentation to now read: The producer(s) of the show. This generally should be for the series' line producer, who receives "Produced by" credit, or the equivalent for animation. and should not be used for low-level writers on the series' writing staff who receive credits such as "producer", "co-producer", or "supervising producer". See the Producers Guild of America guide to television credits for more information regarding live-action credits. (changes emphasized)

Favre1fan93 doesn't even know what the "Produced by" credit equivalent for animation is or if there even is any (from their summary: I can't find a source readily at the moment if the equivalent of a line producer for animation just receives "Producer" credit), they simply updated the documentation presumably because they disagreed with my edits (And when you originally started incorrectly removing them, I added the documentation line "or the equivalent for animation" to cover cases such as these.). Favre1fan93 also decided to ignore an existing discussion (that they're a part of) regarding the parameter's misuse by other editors to list all "producer" credits instead of just "Produced by" credits and potentially either creating a new |produced by= parameter should be created or changing the label of the existing parameter to "Produced by" like in {{Infobox film}}. Another editor also gave their opinion stating that "Producer" credits and "Produced by" credits two separate credits and not the same.

adamstom97, do you mind expounding on your comment? I really would like to know how I decided the parameter's usage was wrong when (speaking from experience) only "Produced by" credit is allowed in live-action television (even when it's actors that are credited as "producer") and Favre1fan93's changes to the documentation were only made after and because of my edits. And feel free to contribute to the template talk discussion regarding the parameter that I have linked to twice now. I'm just in absolute awe of how infallible you guys are. Skeetacus25 (talk) 22:58, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

You are inventing a big issue where none exists. The articles are follow the intent of the documentation, as far as I can tell. We are not listing writers. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

If I am "inventing a big issue where none exist," why was a discussion started this past March regarding the misuse of the parameter by editors to list "producer" credits instead of just the "Produced by" credit? Thank you for being infallible. Skeetacus25 (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Now now, please refrain from making personal attacks and try to remain civil and constructive and focus on the content and documentation, not editorial conduct. I do not personally see any glaring misapplication of the template parameter, nor do I think it to be a drastic issue to warrant such hostility. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 17:30, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

So you are confirming the responses of the previous editors are accurate and that non writer-producer "producer" credits are definitively allowed in the parameter, even if a "Produced by" credit exists, despite existing discussion about the paremeter's misuse by other editors that add all "producer" credits instead of just the "Produced by" credit? This means WP:OR is in order to figure out which are simply producers and which are writer-producers when no reliable source exists, correct? And perhaps you know what the "Produced by" credit equivalent for animation is, since the editor that updated the documentation with that line doesn't seem to know? I look forward to your response to provide some clarity. Skeetacus25 (talk) 20:46, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Additional discussion about the template documentation is happening at Template talk:Infobox television#Producer parameter and discussion should continue there as that is the crux of the issue. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Season 3

Hi. Sorry if there was a discussion about this and I missed it. Which phase should include season 3 of Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man? I couldn't find it in Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Six#Television_series, in Draft:Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Seven, and in Draft:Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Eight#Television series. Only in the phase six group of {{Marvel Cinematic Universe drafts}}. Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 11:15, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this became a point of contention at Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Six § Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man Season 3 due to WP:SYNTHESIS concerns. The material is presently located at List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series (Marvel Studios) § Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man season 3 until we have a source that explicitly places it in a given Phase. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 13:59, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

I see. Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 15:19, 7 June 2026 (UTC)