Talk:Avengers: Endgame/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Russo's confirmed for Infinity War (Part 1 and 2)

here's the source Npamusic (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Filming start date possibly revealed

Potentially January 23, 2017. See here. The source seems a bit questionable to me, but the date does seem plausible. As always, something to keep our eye on. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Move to mainspace checklist

1. Move to the mainspace! This can happen in two ways: contact an admin to perform the move (which requires the deletion of Untitled Avengers film in the mainspace). User:Czar has been helpful in the past to moving the draft. OR place {{db-move|1=[draft page]|2=Filming has begun on the film, allowing it to enter the mainspace per [[WP:NFF]].}} at Untitled Avengers film. DO NOT CUT AND PASTE! (We can ping Czar here when we are ready for the move).  Done
   1. If the moving admin does not do this, be sure to remove {{Draft article}} and unhide the categories.  Done
2. Change the template at List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films#Untitled Avengers sequel (2019) from {{further}} to {{main}} including both this article and the production article. Update the table on the List of films article to link directly to the new article and that its status is "Filming".
   1. Update the templates at The Avengers (2012 film)#Avengers: Infinity War and its sequel, Avengers: Age of Ultron#Sequels and Avengers (comics) in other media#Live action to only include the new film article, not the production article. That doesn't seem immediately appropriate to link from these sections, at least in the hat templates.  Done
3. Add the logo image to the infobox (File:Avengers Infinity War logo.jpg) unless a new one is revealed, in which case, upload that and use it.  Done
4. Fix redirects currently going to Production of Avengers: Infinity War and the untitled Avengers sequel to the new mainspace article. Okay so there are a lot of redirects, so I'm not going to list them all.  Done
   1. We'll also have to make sure things are not piped as [[Production of Avengers: Infinity War and the untitled Avengers sequel|untitled Avengers sequel]], etc. I think once the name change was revealed I handled instances of the first film going to its redirect, with this issue mainly for this film.  Done
5. Add the article link to all the nav boxes used in the article.  Done
6. If Marvel provides us with a press release indicating filming starting, add any info from that to our respective pages (castings mainly).
   1. Yeah this would be a blessing. I think if and when we do get a press release (hopefully) listing all the cast members, that one source can be used in the small production info we have on this article.

As always, let me know if there are any questions or concerns. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

@Czar: This one too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

done and by the way, you can leave the WikiProject banner quality/importance blank and it'll automatically categorize as "draft" in draftspace and as needing assessment when mainspaced czar 06:40, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Where are we moving this too?

@TriiipleThreat, Adamstom.97, and Richiekim: Should it be Untitled Avengers film or Untitled Avengers sequel? We use "the untitled Avengers sequel" in the production article title and at the list of films page, but when Marvel and Disney revealed the name changes, they referred to it specifically as Untitled Avengers (Source), with "film" or "movie" after that (not sure exactly). So should we be using "film" or "sequel" in the title until the official name is revealed? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, an unscientific google search returns twice the amount of hits for "Untitled Avengers sequel". Scratch that. "Untitled Avengers film" returns 3,600 hits, "Untitled Avengers sequel" returns 6,500 hits and "Untitled Avengers movie" returns 23,000 hits. If based solely on that, I'd say "Untitled Avengers film" since we generally refer to films, not movies.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Either would be fine, I think. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

If we use "film", should the production article be renamed, as well as the section at the List of films article and any template use, etc.? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 07:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

I think the current title has a better ring to it than "Production of Avengers: Infinity War and the untitled Avengers film." It also has some continuity to it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe keep the article title (which I agree, is better as is since it is talking about both films together) and other instances, such as the LoF heading, becomes "film". Only reason I'm asking, is I'm going to try and take care of links that go to the production article that should go to this article, to be easier once the move happens. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Zoe Saldana possibly revealed the title

See here. I've created a redirect article for Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet. Also, can we use her quote "we all have to go back for Gauntlet later this year" be used to source the inclusion of Drax, Rocket and Groot, or is it too broad? It can at least for her, and I will be adding that in shortly. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet

Earlier today, Zoe Saldana revealed the title for the Avengers Infinity War sequel and i made some changes here Untitled Avengers film but i don't know how to rename the article to make is Infinity Gauntlet, could someone please change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aidan The Editor (talk • contribs) 00:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

See above, it was an off the cuff remark not anything to be seriously at this point. Besides she said "Guantlet" not "Avengers: Infinity Guantlet". Wait till there's an actual confirmation and we'll discuss a move here.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Avengers 4 Filming end date?

If Avengers 4 starts filming in August and wraps in October or November, then they should wrap in December or January instead because Infinity War will last till June or July, that's 6 or 7 months of filming Infinity War and it's not fair for Avengers 4 to wrap in 3 or 4 months from August to October or November. I think Avengers 4 should start in mid-late July and wrap in December or January. What do you guys think? - EgyptianGamer

These questions are better asked to Marvel Studios, or its president. --Kailash29792 (talk) 10:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I guess we'll wait till August 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianGamer (talk • contribs) 13:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Paul Rudd Is Missing In Cast List On Both Film Articles

Why is this if it's mentioned in his filmography page? 2605:E000:AB28:1500:F9C2:D19F:6351:7F7E (talk) 07:41, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

His article is wrong. He has not been confirmed for these films. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

He's been confirmed for Avengers 3 as of now. - EgyptianGamer

Dave Bautista confirming he'll return as Drax in Avengers 4

Dave Bautista confirms Drax is back in Avengers 4: https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveBautista/status/887105918625775616

 Done - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Avangers Untitled Movie

Scarlett Johansson is confirmed for Avangers Infinity War part 2 Scarlettjo68 (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

you should add her at cast Scarlettjo68 (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Please cite a reliable source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Scarlett Johansson missing on the cast list for the Avengers Infinity War Part 2 Untitled Sequel

She was confirmed in the cast and spotted on set according to an article by cinema blend Jimpat514 (talk) 15:45, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

No reliable source has been provided in order to add her to the list. If you can find one, feel free to add it. - DinoSlider (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Paltrow and Favreau

For clarification (if anyone needed it), here are set photos of the untitled film shoot, with Downey and Paltrow in the same outfits they were in with the image Downey posted, eliminating the possibility of it being an old photo from the Infinity War shoot posted now, despite Downey using "#infinitywar". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:10, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Sebastian Stan confirms he's back for Avengers 4

https://theplaylist.net/sebastian-stan-marvel-tonya-interview-20170911/2/#cb-content

"I’ve got to ask you about “Avengers: Infinity War.” I’m guessing you’ve finished shooting that?

That’s done, yes.

Do you know what you’re doing next?

I know I’m going back there now in October, supposedly continuing the war. I have no idea. I haven’t read the script.

Oh, for the second “Avengers” movie.

Yeah." — Preceding unsigned comment added by RottenRaccoon (talk • contribs) 10:49, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

 Added - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Brie Larson's Captain Marvel confirmed to be in Avengers 4

Atlanta Filming on it's Twitter page has confirmed in tow separate tweets that Brie Larson as Captain Marvel will be in Avengers 4:

https://twitter.com/AtlantaFilming/status/909776343960875010 https://twitter.com/AtlantaFilming/status/909778106029953025 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.22.19.82 (talk) 11:26, September 18, 2017 (UTC)

The twiiter account is unverified and therefore unreliable.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Will this source come down? https://www.comicbookmovie.com/avengers/avengers_infinity_war/it-appears-as-if-brie-larsons-captain-marvel-has-been-confirmed-for-avengers-4-a153895 --KeymixGame (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

If they feel it needs to. CBM always write up articles cantered around speculation so it's no surprise they wrote this one up. Rusted AutoParts 15:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Information gradually began to fly http://screenrant.com/avengers-4-brie-larson-captain-marvel-filming/ --KeymixGame (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Websites want clicks. Twitter account is unverified so it's not reliable with screenrant either.

Also isn't that the same twitter account that claimed they saw Scarlett Johansson on the Spider-Man Homecoming set? Yet she was never in the movie. Rusted AutoParts 16:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:FRUIT which undoubtably all of these sources reporting on this will be. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I believe we finally have our source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Just Jared confirms Atlanta Filming's tweets that Captain Marvel is in Avengers 4

https://mobile.twitter.com/JustJared/status/909846094003232768

Since Wikipedia won't let me post the Just Jared link, I have to link u to the Just Jared story through this tweet.

Even if Just Jared could be used (it can't), the images are only of them at an airport. That doesn't mean anything, unless you want to make your own assumptions based on that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

War Machine confirmed by Gwyneth Paltrow!

Don cheadle confirmed by Paltrow in a interview SrVerde (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Added - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:55, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Paul Rudd

http://screenrant.com/avengers-4-set-photos-new-hawkeye-look/ This article contains link to set photos where not only Hawkeye has a new style, but Paul Rudd is also seen. However, since the only source is a bunch of set photos, what will we do about it? Do we use another article about it as a source or do we wait for another type of source? CAJH (talk) 16:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I think using Screen Rant to source Rudd's inclusion is fine. But we can't use it for the supposed new look of Hawkeye. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

It's ok. I don't think that look is important enough to mention anyways. After all, Rogers' beard and Romanoff's blonde hair were never written in Infinity War article either. CAJH (talk) 16:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Can we use this source now? It's better confirmation for Black Widow & Ant-Man? https://screenrant.com/robert-downey-jr-avengers-4/ - EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Replaced. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:23, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Ty Simpkins from Iron Man 3 is back

Several sources report that Ty Simpkins reprises his Role from Iron Man 3.

http://www.filmstarts.de/nachrichten/18515226.html

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/the-avengers/news/a841248/avengers-4-ty-simpkins-iron-man-3-harley-keener-return/

http://www.premiere.fr/Cinema/News-Cinema/Avengers-4-fera-revenir-Ty-Simpkins-le-gamin-d-Iron-Man-3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:638:1558:E800:9192:915B:A8A1:AFC0 (talk) 10:59, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

WP:FRUIT. Sources trace back to IMDb, which is unreliable. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Kevin Feige confirms Brie Larson as Captain Marvel for Avengers 4

Kevin Feige confirmed to Indie Wire that Brie Larson will appear as Captain Marvel in Avengers 4: http://www.indiewire.com/2017/10/female-superhero-mcu-post-phase-three-1201889036/

He actually didn't. He said, "Really, the focus now is on delivering Captain Marvel and then bringing Captain Marvel’s story into the finale of everything we’ve started thus far."--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:17, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Feige didn't state this himself, but the article says that Larson will appear in Avengers 4: “Captain Marvel” doesn’t start shooting until March, but Larson will appear in that untitled fourth “Avengers” film" Richiekim (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

That is based on Feige's comments which only mentions her story being in the finale. This seems to be another case of WP:Verifiability, not truth.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:45, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

But he says this "Captain Marvel doesn’t start shooting until March, but Larson will appear in that untitled fourth “Avengers” film." Read the source properly! BTW this is EgyptianGamer. EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk) 6:19, 25 October 2017 (PT)

He never said that. See the above response.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:03, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Shuri & Black Panther confirmed for Avengers 4?

Is this reliable to confirm Black Panther and Shuri for Avengers 4? https://screenrant.com/avengers-4-set-photos-black-panther-shuri/ Looks both reliable and unreliable in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 08:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

No, the source is an unverified twitter account.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Damn! Wait for a better confirmation.

Extra Thanos confirmation

This source should be added for extra confirmation for Thanos in Avengers 4, can someone add it please? https://screenrant.com/avengers-4-thanos-return-josh-brolin-announcement/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 12:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Setting of 1940's

The movie is filming scenes settled in the 1940's, as flashback maybe with Chris Evans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.35.29.153 (talk) 22:27, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Scarlett Johannson confirms Brie Larson's Captain Marvel is in Avengers 4

Now can we add Brie Larson as Captain Marvel to the wiki page of Avengers 4? Because Scarlett Johannson has confirmed, via Vanity Fair, that she'll be in Avengers 4: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/11/the-future-of-the-marvel-cinematic-universe-robocop

It has been added. --Kailash29792 (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 29 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (non-admin closure) James (^talk/_contribs) 00:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

---

Untitled Avengers film → Untitled Avengers: Infinity War sequel – I suggest moving this article to Untitled Avengers: Infinity War sequel because the current title is overly banal. It is more beneficial to readers to state that it is a sequel to Avengers: Infinity War, however untitled, compared to saying it is some untitled Avengers film with no indication of timeline placement. We need to remember that not everyone follows the Marvel Cinematic Universe religiously. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

• It seems to me that "Untitled Avengers film" is WP:PRECISE enough. I don't think there are any other untitled films based on the Avengers. The policy states "Titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that. For instance, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta is too precise, as Mother Teresa is precise enough to indicate exactly the same topic." Where the film fits in the in-universe chronology is readily available in the prose. That said, I'm pretty indifferent to the name change as its not the film's title anyway.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Beyond being the "official" name of the film currently from Marvel and Disney, it is also the name used by may reliable sources when discussing it. In addition, per RedirectViews, this name space for the year gets a far superior view count at a daily average of 3,500. The next one is not even close with a daily average of 11 and "Untitled Avengers: Infinity War sequel" which Erik is suggesting this be moved to is currently 4th on that view list. If that daily average between 2 and 1, and the name Erik wants to move it to, was somewhat closer, say at at least 1,000 views, then that would make sense to consider this move. But readers aren't having an issue finding the article or searching for it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

  The redirect views aren't relevant here because they are biased toward the current configuration. We are dealing with the ideal descriptive title here. Before the trailer for Avengers: Infinity War came out, Untitled Avengers film could easily have been associated with that film. Now that association is less likely, but it's still not clearly associated with Avengers: Infinity War itself. To use another example, let's say that they already started filming a second Han Solo film. Since we have Solo: A Star Wars Story established, would we resurrect Untitled Han Solo film for that second film? Doesn't that seem ambiguous or nebulous to do? I think it makes more sense to do something like Untitled Solo: A Star Wars Story sequel. For so-called sequels without final titles, we either do "<film title> 2" or "Untitled <film title> sequel". Essentially, this requested move more clearly associates this film as the successor to a specific predecessor. It is more wordy, sure, but it is more precise. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support it's a WP:NATURAL title and Erik is right to be giving the reader context. Helpful. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
• Comment: Wasn't the idea with this film that it initially was titled "Pt 2" and then it wasn't? If so than I'd have to oppose the move, as we don't know why that title was dropped. It's possible that the film is no longer considered to be a direct "sequel" to Infinity Wars, in which case it would be just guessing if we moved it to that title. --Deathawk (talk) 07:33, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

  That is getting too nitpicky. "Sequel" is being used here in the simplest sense, that it comes after Avengers: Infinity War, regardless of whether or not it will be some kind of part two. If anything, this title is technically better than The Avengers: Infinity War 2 in avoiding full-on story connection. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

But given the history of the project, I would say that it does have implications that wouldn't be inherited by other such page moves. As such my vote still remains Opposed.--Deathawk (talk) 04:45, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support, while the prose clears up the timeline issue, it's helpful for the title to make this unambiguous. —Locke Cole • t • c 10:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose - from what I've read, the producers have repeatedly said they aren't considering this film as direct sequel, but rather a follow on film in the Avengers franchise. That's why they changed the name and dropped the "pt 2". Moving this page to have the film called a "sequel", especially when is goes against recent, reliable sources, is both incorrect and asking for trouble, in the form of on-going disputes and debates on the matter. That said, I would support a move to "Untitled 2019 Avengers film", just for the sake of clarity. - ^theWOLFchild 20:01, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

  Thewolfchild, that is getting too pedantic. The vast majority of readers aren't familiar with whether or not it is part two. "Sequel" is being used here in the broadest sense, that it comes after Avengers: Infinity War, regardless of storyline connection. Readers benefit more from recognizing more immediately that there is an Avengers film that will be released after Infinity War is released. The details of the premise can be conveyed in the article itself. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Really...? I just posted my opinion, with an explanation, like I was asked to. Like everyone else here. You, on the other hand, pestering everyone who opposes you is kind of WP:DICK-ish behavior. Just let it play out. Sheesh. - ^theWOLFchild 15:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support simply in the interest of cohesion.Trillfendi (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Title is clear enough already, and it's temporary anyway. Readers aren't having trouble finding it. In the unlikely event they announce production of Avengers 5 before giving this one a subtitle, I'll reconsider. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Wrap date and info on Loki for Infinity War

Please add these! https://screenrant.com/avengers-4-filming-wrap-january/ https://screenrant.com/loki-aligns-with-thanos-avengers-infinity-war/ Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 12:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Filming wrap date?

Can we add this? Stan talks about the film wrapping in mid-Jan. Should we add it? https://screenrant.com/avengers-4-filming-wrap-january/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 05:06, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2018

Chadwick Boseman should be added to cast list:

• Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa / Black Panther: The king of the African nation of Wakanda, who gained his enhanced strength by ingesting the Heart-Shaped Herb.

Source: http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/new-avengers-4-set-pics-feature-black-panther/#gallery-3 Austin2179 (talk) 18:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

 Added with similar, more reliable source. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Cast

Ty simpkins added in cast Asj052 (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Withholding title backfired

Withholding title backfired http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/04/23/marvel-studios-kevin-feige-on-why-the-decision-to-withhold-avengers-4-title-backfired --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Bustle exclusive [1] --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2018

47.63.114.92 (talk) 13:49, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 14:22, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Cast citations need a revamping

Many of the cast citations are simply references to the actors agreeing to a certain number of movies or confirming for Avengers: Infinity War back when it was going to be a Part I/Part II deal and it's assumed they'd appear in both. These need to be examined and re-confirmed or new sources need to be found that don't make those assumptions. I don't follow entertainment news very closely, so I'm not sure where to go for reliable sources. GaidinBDJ (talk) 03:46, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Emma Fuhrmann as Cassie Lang.

Why was it removed? A First party source is the best what we can have. Then we know, that's the truth. What's wrong with this. Source for this information: http://resumes.breakdownexpress.com/419841-1585104 --Maintrance (talk) 15:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

We should avoid self-published sources and use third-party ones whenever possible. We are also in no rush. Actors can also add roles to resumes that may ultimately not make it to the final version of the film. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:46, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

"Breakdown Express" is the "Casting Service Agency", they should know, what for roles their actress/actors got in casting processes for the movie. Fuhrmann herselve is not the author. --Maintrance (talk) 09:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Even though they may not make it into the final cut of the film, this doesn't negate the fact that the actor is currently cast in this film...--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Then we need an RS to support that claim. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Release marketing section

Am I reading this right? Is this section just speculation from a blog post on how Marvel might market the movie? Capnpitz (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

It is critical commentary, and includes comments from the studios involved. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Cast

Greetings. Based on human logic, we should erase, until further notice, certain names of the cast. I do not know why it is based on INFINITY War BILLING BLOCK. I know they left us a mess. But we must not speculate, for now, we must guide ourselves in the facts. Am I authorized? At the moment I have located 11 names. --Berposen (talk) 23:49, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

The cast is based on who has been confirmed to return, ordered based on the Infinity War billing. Removing cast members based on what happened in a different film would be speculation itself. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hiddleston in Avengers 4

The included citation for Hiddleston's casting in Avengers 4 is is from back when Avengers 4 was "Avengers: Infinity War Part 2", and I read or misread it as if it shorthands "Avengers: Infinity War Part 2" as "Avengers 2". There are better (current) sources out there and I've selected one (although it seems still not a great one). Can we update that citation to a current citation that relates to the two movies that are no longer "Infinity War Parts 1 & 2"? -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't see the need. The source, clear as day, states: He will also play a part in Avengers: Infinity Part 1 and Part 2. Sources stating IW Part 2 still apply to this article, even though they are no longer titled by that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2018

82.16.65.11 (talk) 17:35, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

add a plot and make some cast changes

Films not out yet, what plot is there to add? And what cast changes do you mean? Rusted AutoParts 17:36, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sam Sailor 21:25, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Pfeffier, Goldblum, Douglas

Should we add these three in here? I remember Sebastian Stan stating they were involved in the two parter, and considering the first is now out and they weren’t in it it demonstrates they’ll be in this one, no? Rusted AutoParts 17:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)]

I EgyptianMarvelSWFan vote maybe yes. And what about Jackson and Hurt??

Requested move 1 June 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

---

Untitled Avengers film → Avengers 4 – Although the film is still untitled, many sources talk about it as "Avengers 4" (it wouldn't be a mere descriptive name, but a name that is actually used in sources). A search for "Avengers 4" in Google news (see here gives 4,890,000 results, and a search for the words "Avengers" and "untitled" just gives 53,000, see here. Cambalachero (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Comment This is not a vote for or against. The number of Google results, especially for something a term like this, is not a reliable method of determining the common name. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:03, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Oppose: This is just a temporary holding space. The page will likely moved again once the title is revealed and according to sources that would be sooner rather than later.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:13, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Oppose just wait. I'd even say OP should close this or that it be speedy closed. No point getting into a big discussion when the title is surely going to be announced soon. -- Netoholic @ 20:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Oppose I don't see Avengers 4 being significantly used more than untitled Avengers, and we already mention both. The actual title will likely be announced soon, so there isn't much point changing it to this now. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:39, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Oppose While the title has been shortened to Avengers 4, it does not really constitute that the title of the article be called as such. Remember, that's not even the final title.Voicebox64 (talk) 04:34, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Avengers 4 Reshoots

Please add as multiple sources are confirming this or it's not reliable? Let me know, thanks. Also add it for Spider-Man 2 filming end as it says filming ends till December. https://screenrant.com/avengers-4-reshoots-spider-man-homecoming-2-filming/ - EgyptianMarvelSWFan — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Plot summary states Loki and others are killed in Part One

The Cast section is currently using the Cast list from Part One without noting the "killed" cast members in Part One. My edit has indicated that the Cast section should include a short notice that some of the Cast members were killed and may not be appearing in Part Two. User:Triiiple is reverting even though the first paragraph of the current plot summary of Infinity Wars is stating that Loki is "killed". 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)

Requesting comments from other editors. Should some edit be made to recognize that some of the killed cast members from Part One may not be returning for Part Two? FutureForecasts (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Especially given the nature of the story, I don't think we should be making any assumptions about cast members based on the plot of the previous film. Let's wait for reliable sources. Nitpicking polish (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I have already responded to this same discussion at Talk:Production of Avengers: Infinity War and the untitled Avengers sequel. I suggest we stick to just one. Either way, we should go by reliable sources not the guesses of editors who think they know what will happen in one film based on watching a different one. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:38, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

If sources explicitly state that they are in part two then we follow the sources, with no comment on if they are being brought back from their deaths. In the case of sources being ambiguous or speculative we should just leave them out for the time being. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

There is currently no reliable source to tell us that anyone of the killed cast in Part One is returning/reviving/resurrecting for Part Two which I could find published after the release of Part One. None. Since this is a Part One going into Part Two sequence of films, then the fact that Part One includes death scenes of killed cast members is a reliable source for their deaths as is currently shown in the Infinity War plot summary on Wikipedia. If anyone has a reliable source from after the release of Part One for killed cast members from Part One returning for roles in Part Two then let us see it. Otherwise it is original research to claim that they are returning in Part Two. The article should indicate which cast members were killed in Part One, Loki's death and the others. FutureForecasts (talk) 17:38, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

No, it is original research to decide ourselves which reliable sources to ignore based on the fictional events depicted in a film. If there is no new source saying the old ones were intentionally misleading to hide the events of this film, then we don't get to make that decision. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

We get many reliable sources during the filming part of a production for who has been cast and is appearing. For this film, that happened to be concurrent with Infinity War. Going by on screen deaths is hardly a way to make decisions, especially in this case. Not to mention that what happens plot wise in Infinity War is irrelevant here because there are many narrative options available to allow characters who have "died" to reappear (see flashbacks, dream sequences, alternate realities, etc.). And based on that, if that does happen, we note that for the character in the plot section most likely. All in all, none of the edits that were attempted to add should have been. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:05, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Outside reviewers of the film have indicated regret for the death of Loki since he represented such a cult following in the various previous franchise films. So many reviewers have also made the point that these two films (Part One leading into Part Two) are not two random entry points in the Marvel universe but that they are sequenced for release as a Part One followed by a pre-announced Part Two. Therefor some mention should occur somewhere in this article of these deaths since the death of Loki and other killed cast members is already mentioned in the film article for Infinity War. Their deaths should be mentioned somewhere in this article. FutureForecasts (talk) 14:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps add something like "He died in the aftermath of Infinity War"? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

How do you know that his appearance here leads on from his role in Infinity War? You are still making guesses based on a different film from this one. If we get a source saying that Loki will appear as some sort of phantom, then it might make sense to clarify that he has previously been killed off. Or if we start explaining how characters are brought back to life, it will of course make sense to explain that they were killed first. But until we get something like that, we can only go off what we have been told and not what our best guess of the future is. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

If Emir is stating that it is best to keep this edit as short as possible in this article then I am agreeing with him. Also, there is nothing in the new teaser trailers for Costume Upgrades for Part Two published now in June to suggest that any of the killed cast from Part One will be returning for Part Two as published here: [2]. The killed cast members in Part One need to be identified in this article concerning what is stated about the returning cast of Part Two. FutureForecasts (talk) 16:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Again, no they don't. Who is or isn't "killed" in the previous film is a plot detail, not even related to this film. Character descriptions do not include plot info, only the basics descriptions for the character. However, if we have statements from either the actor, writers, directors, or producers discussing the "death" in the previous film in regards to this film, then something can be included. But we don't have anything like that at this time for any of the "dead" characters, and we don't just make that statement for the need of identifying that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Another editor, Shayan, yesterday is also noting this issue in his edit yesterday in the article. Multiple editors are now noticing this issue about the killed cast members from Part One. The directors of this film are serious filmmakers and it seems odd to think that the killed cast members died in Part One as random thoughts by these directors. Could I suggest that it makes sense to add something to the current description of Loki here in the article which now states: "Thor's adoptive brother." It can be left this way with a phrase added to state that "Loki was portrayed as being killed in Part One". FutureForecasts (talk) 15:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I feel like you are not hearing anything we are saying. We are not a fan wikia. Not only is who did or didn't "die" plot info from another film, it does not automatically make any of those actors/characters unable to appear in some form in this film. If reliable sources come out before the film releases stating one of these methods of return, we can include it. Additionally, yes these two films were once a "part 1/part 2" situation, but not as much any more, yet another reason not to note this. And as I said in my previous comment, we can add such a statement if we have context for it with comments from the actor or filmmakers. Other than that, we are just pandering to trivial info, which isn't the purpose of Wikipedia. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Word Change in Ant-Man's description

• Paul Rudd as Scott Lang / Ant-Man: A former petty criminal who acquired a suit that allows him to shrink or grow in scale but increase in strength.

"but increase in strength." should be "and increase in strength." IsyRivers (talk) 15:09, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 00:05, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

References

Premise

The premise section reads like it was written by a marketing agency or a fanboy. It seems like an ad - "will draw audiences" "our beloved heroes". It's very inappropriate for Wikipedia. 178.250.162.242 (talk) 07:40, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Isn't one of these sources good? http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/05/22/avengers-4-synopsis-released/ https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/avengers-4-synopsis-sacrifice-tease-iron-man-captain-america-dead-a8365491.html Let me know as I think I'm gonna wait for a better one later in the year. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EgyptianMarvelSWFan (talk • contribs) 11:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The source isn’t the problem, it’s just too vague to be useful. We’re better off just waiting for a better one.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Karen Gillan should be credited as part of the main cast as she is one of the surviving characters. And she plays a vital role in the comics Infinity1822 (talk) 21:31, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Karen Gillan (Nebula) in Avengers 4

Karen Gillan Should be credited as part of the main cast as Nebula is one of the surviving members after Infinity War and her character plays a vital role in the comics Infinity1822 (talk) 21:35, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Please provide a source. We don't engage in WP:OR or WP:SPECULATION based off the comics. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

And please drop the all-caps in edit summaries. Drmies (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Michael Douglas in Untitled Avengers film

Where's Michael Douglas on Untitled Avengers film? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.255.217.165 (talk) 22:33, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 31 July 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

---

Untitled Avengers film → Avengers 4 – Following the release of Avengers: Infinity War, it appears that this film has become more frequently referred to as Avengers 4. Obviously it is not the official title, but is the most common colloquial title, and we should have that until an official title is established. Similar recent precedent with Terminator 6. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:38, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

• Wait. At some point, this is going to get an "official" title. I see no point in moving it now, when it's just going to need to be moved again in weeks or months time... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:36, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  The point of moving it now is for readers, who are likely to search for "Avengers 4" (based on the frequent use of this colloquial title), to land on an article with that title. To redirect to "Untitled Avengers film" may be unnecessarily confusing for some. We have to consider readers who are not full-on MCU fans and may not understand what "untitled Avengers film" means. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:06, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  Avengers 4 is already a redirect to the same – IOW, readers will find it fine when they search for "Avengers 4". It doesn't need to be moved in the meantime. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  Yes, I know that. This is not a huge problem or anything like that. However, the current article title can be slightly detrimental in an unnecessary way when readers are redirected to "Untitled Avengers film" when it could simply be "Avengers 4". If "Avengers 4" is the most common reference for this film, why don't you want Wikipedia to reflect that? Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose As with IJBall, I'd say hold off still. We went through this recently on June 1 (see above) and as with that one, and now, "untitled Avengers film" is used frequently by sources referring to the film. Plus, since that request, we have from Feige that the title is coming at the end of the year, so it will only be a few more months. I also don't know if this is representative of searches done, but "Avengers 4" is only averaging about 400-500 page views (after a huge spike around the release of Infinity War), so that isn't really that much, or an indication we are doing a disservice to the readers not having the article at that title. Also, Disney ~officially~ title the film "Untitled Avengers film" when they removed the "Infinity War-Part 2" title. Had that not happened, I would be in support of the move. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. We'll get the actual title soon anyway. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - probably should have been this from the start, but at this point we might as well wait for the official title. -- Netoholic @ 07:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. Holden0152 (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - We're expected to find out the official name at the end of this year. There's no point in having it changed for a couple months only for it to be re-changed to the official title. - Lwilsher02 (talk) 10:33, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. Misleading as readers may mistake "Avengers 4" as an "official title". "Terminator 6" is problematic in the same way, as it has been italicised in the text, something that can be avoided if the article is given a descriptive title. --woodensuperman 13:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
• Wait per IJBall. Airbornemihir (talk) 01:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per IJBall. Callmemirela 🍁 ^talk 21:04, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
• Wait per above. The title will be announced in a few months. BlindmanJr (talk) 22:48, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Change Title to Avengers 4

A couple of days ago, I was on the DC Extended Universe Wikipedia page and I was reading in the talk that there had been requests to change it to Worlds of DC or Untitled DC Cinematic Universe. Untitled Avengers Film has the same problem. On Wikipedia it is referred to as UAF but everywhere else calls it Avengers 4. DCEU keeps it's name on the page because it is the most common term for it which is the same as Avengers 4. I search up news about the movie each day and every single webpage I go onto calls it Avengers 4 because it is the most common term for the film. I think we should rename it Avengers 4 until the official title comes out along with the trailer in November/December. Because, people are going to search up Avengers 4, not Untitled Avengers Film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic Moore (talk • contribs) 03:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Please see the previous discussions on this at #Requested move 1 June 2018 and #Requested move 31 July 2018 above. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:31, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2018

Please change the name of the Article from "Untitled Avengers film" to "Avengers 4: Annihilation" as the trailer for the film has been released and has shown the title of the film as well. Purvanshtrivedi (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Please provide a reliable source.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 09:36, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Those are all lies its still Untitled Avengers Movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph.ludwig (talk • contribs) 15:40, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Tilda Swinton confirmed for Avengers 4

Tilda Swinton will play The Ancient One in Avengers 4, confirmded Frank Grillo. https://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/10/26/avengers-4-major-marvel-character-returns-ancient-one/

WP:FRUIT. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding characters who were snapped by Thanos

Why aren't we addressing this in the cast list? I think leaving them there without mentioning their fate in the last films is a little bit jarring to say the least. - Jasonbres (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

We don't know what their roles in this film will be, only that they are in it. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:46, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Untitled Avengers clips were not shown at CineEurope

This article currently states that "exclusive glimpses from [Untitled Avengers]" were shown at CineEurope, "including a scene featuring Tony Stark and Scott Lang". This is not true, and in fact Disney confirmed to MCU Cosmic that only clips with Kevin Feige were shown. Minindo (talk) 08:33, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit: This is now fixed. Thanks, fellow Wikipedian. Minindo (talk) 23:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

References

Lift Page Protection

I Can Add Hugh Jackman And Samuel L. Jackson If Someone Lifts The Page Protection PLEASE!!! Coolguy3478 (talk) 04:54, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done This is exactly why we have page protection here, to stop people like you from adding whatever the hell you want. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Can someone please add Tilda Swinton to the cast list?

It has been confirmed by Avengers 4 executive producer Michael Grillo that “when we got Tilda Swinton, she was just a 1-day availability” while shooting the film. This statement was made at the Austin Film Festival, and is corroborated by an interview done by Mark Ruffalo in which he claimed to have enjoyed filming with Tilda Swinton on the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B91302 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

References

We don't actually know if she's in the film. It's clear she did do filming for the film, but her role would most likely be short if she was only available for a day so her scenes may of been cut. Also we do not yet have confirmation from Marvel about her role in Avengers 4. So until we see her in marketing, get an announcement or see her in the film, I don't feel she should be added yet. Mystic Moore (talk) 11:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Lift The Page Protection And I Can Do It

Coolguy3478 (talk) 00:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Why would a producer mention Swinton filming her part only to have it be cut and disappoint the fans? I of course can understand the reluctancy regarding the situation as we know very little about the film.

B91302 (talk) 03:03, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Title: Annihilation

I think the movie's title is Annihilation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:6199:1E00:616C:6973:62FC:F5A4 (talk) 02:44, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source or a concrete proposal for a change to this article? I've seen that rumour too, but I think it's probably too early for us to say. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:29, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Assuming, of course, you mean "Annihilation". Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:31, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

When the trailer comes out we will know whether you are right or wrong. Ludwigjoey (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Trailer is out. He was dead wrong. Armegon (talk) 13:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 December 2018

Change the Avenger's Endgame image to a larger one. The Insignificant Philosopher (talk) 13:32, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: For copyright reasons, the image must be a scaled-down low-resolution image. See WP:NFC. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 December 2018

I want to change the names of the cast members, like Clint Barton will be Clint Barton/Ronin. TheLastJedi33 (talk) 15:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Box office prediction

Is this too early to include? JOEBRO64 18:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. That's speculation at this point. Let's wait for the film and check its actual box office. Cambalachero (talk) 19:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Score

The article cites Comicbook.com[3] for score information for Infinity War and Endgame. However, that announcement was made in June 2016 and the Infinity War score was released in April 2018[4], per the source cited in the soundtrack article. Now that we know that Alan Silvestri did, in fact, score the film, we should say that, instead of the less precise claim that he had been hired to do it. A pertinent example is James Gunn being hired to direct the sequel to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 - it's a fact, but it would be misleading to place it front and centre in the article without clarifying that he has now been fired. Airbornemihir (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

The version of the article that you want does not make sense. In June 2016, Silvestri had not even started working on the Infinity War score. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:13, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: that's a valid concern. Would it work to cite a more recent source, such as TechAdvisor [5] earlier this month? Airbornemihir (talk) 01:25, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

But I don't see why we need to change it. We definitely should be citing the initial announcement, and at that time he was announcing that he would return for both Infinity War and Endgame. The only way we could use an updated source is to add something along the lines of "He did go on to compose the Infinity War score" which seems a bit janky to me, and unnecessary since I think most readers are going to make the assumption unless we say otherwise. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: All right. I don't want to wander into bludgeon territory (although there are only two people in this discussion) so I'll just note it seems janky to me, in a similar way, for the "Music" section to keep looking like it hasn't been updated since June 2016. I guess this is somewhat subjective, so I'm not going to push it further. Cheers, Airbornemihir (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

To be clear, I agree that it looks like it has not been updated since June 2016, but I do not think that will be an issue once we have some more content in the section which will likely refer to his completed work on Infinity War. So I think WP:NORUSH applies here. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Change of date release date in introduction

It says in introduction the following: "The film is scheduled to be released in the United States on April 26, 2019, in IMAX and 3D." This is not true. The film is scheduled to release in the United Kingdom on April 26, 2019, while it is releasing in the United States on May 3, 2019. I would like it to be edited to say the correct date(s). TheGreatGameLord (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

The poster and trailer confirmed that it has been moved up like Infinity War last year. -- Zoo (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps the extended page protection should be reduced as well. Roadsguy (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

The protection level is definitely helping with the vandalism. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

I just meant reduce it so that it ends on the April 26 when it comes out instead of the original release date of May 3. Roadsguy (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2018

In the Marketing section, before the sentence, "The first trailer for the film was released on December 7, 2018," This line should be added:

"The trailer was originally scheduled to be released on December 5, 2018, but was postponed for the funeral of former President George H. W. Bush. The first trailer for the film was released on December 7, 2018. 

Thank you, sincerely HAL333 HAL333 (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Have you got a source? Matt14451 (talk) 22:01, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Those were rumours and were reported as such. Marvel has not commented on why they released the trailer the day they did. Reach Out to the Truth 05:15, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

"Intended to be the sequel"

What is the necessity of this phrase? What does it have to do with WP:CRYSTAL? Popcornduff (talk) 17:57, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Things can still change between now and release. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:51, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

That's an absurd application of the rule. By this logic we should also write that it is intended to be released by Disney, or that it is intended to be in the superhero genre. Popcornduff (talk) 18:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think it's feasible to argue that this could end up being an indirect sequel. Is this lack of certainty coming from a source? Argento Surfer (talk) 19:34, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Popcornduff that "intended to be" is unnecessary. It should be dropped. Keep the language simple. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

My God, how I long to keep the language simple... Popcornduff (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Like Favre said, anything can happen. The film is uncompleted and unreleased. The wording should reflect that this is a future event and circumstances may change.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

So the whole article should be written as a hypothetical then? Do sources support the lack of certainty about it's status as a direct sequel to Avengers 3? Argento Surfer (talk) 20:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, sources support the fact that it has not been released. The film is not beyond being shelved, scrapped, etc.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I think you know what I was asking for, but please, provide a reliable source that indicates this multi-million dollar production might be scrapped. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:53, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Likewise, I think you know its not about being a direct or indirect sequel, but more about if it will even be the next in a line of a sequence of films.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I never said it will be, but it is not out of the realm of possibility. Stranger things have happened. Point being we do not write about future events as if they have already occurred.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

So it's intended to be distributed by Disney then? Argento Surfer (talk) 21:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Perhaps, we should change the current wording to reflect that.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Done, but I bet it doesn't stick. Argento Surfer (talk) 21:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

The word "intended" can be removed entirely. If it was in development hell or the script was getting shopped around, more cautious language would be needed. If there were an actual dispute, such as any sources who actually said "Well, Disney calls it a sequel but it's really a soft reboot" and someone else says, "No, it's a hard reboot, no it's an homage based on the franchise..." But nobody is saying that. Nobody disputes what film they are making or what it is going to be. The only bit of crystal ball reduction we have here is that it's not in the can yet. Readers should be adequately cautioned that we'll see it when we see it and until we see it, nothing about the final release is a fact. It is a fact that they are making the direct sequel Infinity War, it's a fact that they are making Marvel's 22nd film (exhausting! it has to be said) and it's a fact that they're making a movie based on the Avengers comics. We know with sufficient confidence they are working on that, and not working on a musical comedy set in medieval Spain. It's sufficient to just be clear that it's not done yet. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I would say that it's certain beyond reasonable doubt that this will be released by Disney, etc etc. Of course, there could be a meteor strike that kills all of humanity between today and the release date or something, but I would say that a simpler wording is fine. Juxlos (talk) 22:02, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Is "set to be distributed" not a less wonky way of phrasing this? "Intended" just doesn't sound right in this context. Sandrobost (talk) 22:21, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Is there even anyone outside the groupthink involved with this set of articles that even supports "intended to be" here? Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 00:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

The problem with this groupthink is that the articles suffer a cookie-cutter approach where everything is exactly the same, to a fault. Here's Google showing similar articles with "intended to be": results. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 01:00, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

What is the fault? It is accurate. For the record, “intended”/“set”/“scheduled” makes no difference to me but we should avoid the finality and prophetizing of “is”, and “will be”. —TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:13, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

"Intended" is a loaded word that casts doubt where there is no serious (serious = non-FRINGE) doubt. See WP:CLAIM. "Disney insisted the movie was going to be based on the Avengers. They claimed that it would be the 22nd Marvel movie. Disney speculated that the released version, if it is ever finished, let alone distributed, would be about superheroes. Disney press releases argued that it would be a sequel to Age of Ultron." Etc. See how silly that sounds? It's a violation of NPOV to introduced loaded terms that express greater doubt or concern for the truthfulness of a statement than is expressed by our sources. None of our sources describe Disney's announced plans as shifty or flakey. The solution is to use flat, neutral language: "Disney said the film was going to be about guys in tights fighting space demigods."

You can begin a paragraph saying, "<company> said the movie will have <X>." and then add sentences said what else <company> will do: "The movie will have Y. The movie will have Z." If the first sentence tells us they said will do a thing [in the future], then the sentences that follow can be reasonably assumed to also be things the company said (not claimed, not speculated, not dreamed up) they will do [in the future]. We aren't saying in Wikipedia's voice what will happen; we have provided in text attribution for who is telling us what they will do. Any doubt as to the reliability or the veracity of their intentions must be based on sources, not a knee-jerk skepticism invented out of whole cloth by a Wikipedia editor. That is enough of a disclaimer. No loaded terms like "intended"need to be piled on, out, -- what? -- a apparent lack of respect for the reader's intelligence? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

I think this stems in WP:FILM's traditional habit of saying for films' release dates that it is "scheduled/set/intended" to be released on a given date. In general, it makes sense if the date years or months out because dates can change. When the release date is a lot closer, then that qualifier becomes less and less necessary (though I have no idea where the threshold could be). But that qualifier seems to be leaking to other, more definite characteristics of films. For Wonder Woman 1984, it "is intended to be the sequel to 2017's Wonder Woman", and like you said, it casts doubt on that characteristic. With a group of the same editors writing these articles in virtual lockstep, one bad practice affects them all, and outside pressure (like this discussion) is needed to correct such behavior. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:44, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

This kind of reminds me of when you find publications still using “allegedly” after a criminal has already either plead guilty or been convicted with undeniable proof. Like “It’s obvious they did it so why is it 'allegedly' still being used?”. I know in some cases “sequel” can be used pretty loosely, like Bigger Fatter Liar, but Endgame and WW84 use the word “sequel” with every ounce of its meaning ever since their respective announcements. Endgame in particular was literally “Untitled Avengers Sequel” for at least a year!--Fradio71 (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Definitely release dates are purely hypothetical and they definitely slip and slip again, and even if the movie is done on time, they can move it for many reasons. It's totally fine to use cautious language to make clear the release date isn't certain and the studio's announced release date shuld be taken with a huge grain of salt. Any speculation as to how it will perform or whether it will win awards -- totally different, and should be treated with extreme skepticism, especially claims by the studio about how great it will be. As I said on Talk:Tesla Roadster (2020), extraordinary claims by the manufacturer about how astoundingly record-setting the performance of a future product will be should be presented with very explicit in-text attribution to the biased, conflict-of-interest source, and should often not be in articles at all.

But this other stuff? Is it really an Avengers movie? Will it really be distributed by Disney Studios? Not extraordinary claims, and there is litte to no reason to think it will be anything other than what they say. Attribute in-text who the future promises come from, with neutral phrasing: "X said it will be a foo" and don't belabor that point. Saying it once is enough.

Is it really a direct sequel? WHO CARES? If they say it is, then sure, it's a direct sequel. Why are we questioning this? Because sources question it? No. Take out the word "direct". WHO CARES if it's a direct sequel or just a sequel? Fussing over direct sequel vs sequel is bikeshedding. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:28, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Nobody is questioning, who is the distributor, or what type of sequel it might be. The question is “has it been distributed”. If the answer is no, you cannot factually say that it has been when not a single copy has been shipped. Likewise, you cannot call it the 22nd film before it has been released. As you all say release dates are subject to change. It could bomb in test screenings and be sent back for reshoots, in which case Spider-Man: Far from Home may end up being the 22nd film. This happened recently with both New Mutants and X-Men: Dark Phoenix. Captain Marvel traded slots with two other MCU films, it was originally supposed to be the 19th film and has fallen back to #21. Nothing is a sure thing.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys, just joining in here with my opinion. Triiiple is correct in that we cannot be certain of the future and need to carefully word things if they could change. That is a pretty basic CRYSTALBALL issue. Despite that, I would be willing to remove the "set" wording from it being a sequel since we know the film exists now, and that is something that could be applied across the page since filming has begun. So once filming begins, a film article can be certain about some things (it exists, it is being written and directed already, etc.) but we still need to be careful about changing release dates (when it comes out, what order it comes out in a franchise, etc.). - adamstom97 (talk) 20:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

And it was principally filmed right after Infinity War, so “intended to be the sequel” should be “is the sequel”, even if it never gets released, would still be “the unreleased sequel--Fradio71 (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Borderline WP:FORUM posts from Coolguy3478

Comments pointing to the first source found through Google about potential actors/characters

Please Read Can Someone Finally Add Samuel L. Jackson,He Was Confirmed On Set Photos.Finally. Coolguy3478 (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Also If U Lift The Page Protection,I Won't Touch It,Exept For Samuel L. Jackson Coolguy3478 (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Where did you read that? I have searched in google for "endgame" and "Nick Fury", and only found fan theories and speculation. Cambalachero (talk) 11:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC) https://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Samuel_L._Jackson Go To Apperances It Says Avengers:Endgame Coolguy3478 (talk) 14:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC) Not a reliable source, anyone can edit it. Sandrobost (talk) 15:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC) What The Hell Do U Mean,People Say THIS Isn't A Reliable Source For Crying Out Loud Coolguy3478 (talk) 16:17, 27 December 2018 (UTC) Wikis are considered an WP:SPS, which are unreliable and not permissible.—-TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC) @Coolguy3478:, Wikipedia is not a reliable source on its own, you are 100% correct. However, because of the verifiability, no original research and the fact that we try to use reliable sources, you can usually weed out incorrect/fake information by looking to see if something has a source, then looking at the source yourself. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:55, 28 December 2018 (UTC) Note that the wiki references the Jackson part on this article. It mentions that Sebastian Stan (Bucky) said in an interview "You look around and you just saw everyone from Samuel L. Jackson to Michael Douglas to Michelle Pfeiffer. Everybody was there." And then speculates if that means that he inadvertently spoiled Fury's appearance in the film. But it's just that: speculation. Michael Rooker has also been in the set of "Infinity War", but it was just a deliberate misdirection to make people think that he would be in the film and then make his death in GOTG 2 come as a surprise. Unless we have a direct and clear confirmation, as in "yes, Jackson will appear in the film" (or the film is finally released and he's in it), then we shouldn't add him yet. Cambalachero (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC) Type Up "Avengers Set Photos Confirm Nick Fury And Maria Hill" On Google Coolguy3478 (talk) 04:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC) See What U Get Coolguy3478 (talk) 04:13, 28 December 2018 (UTC) Nothing from reliable sources that's for sure. And even if we were to entertain such (WP:FRUIT applies), one would see that the photos are from their appearance in Infinity War. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:07, 28 December 2018 (UTC) Never Mind About That,Type THIS Up Avengers Endgame: Here’s everyone who will return after Thanos’ snap Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Avengers Endgame: Here’s everyone who will return after Thanos’ snap Type That UP Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC) No, we will not "Type That UP". Please provide reliable sources that you find to support your information. Thank you and have a pleasant day. --Ebyabe (talk) 03:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Indianexpress.com Coolguy3478 (talk) 03:31, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Its On Google News It Says Avengers Endgame: Here’s everyone who will return after Thanos’ snap Coolguy3478 (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC) But It Won't Let Me Put It Here Coolguy3478 (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Here I Have An Idea: Lift The Page Protection For 10 Minutes When I Tell U,I'll Put SLJ,And The Source For Him,And Then Tell Me What U Think Coolguy3478 (talk) 03:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC) You need to stop. There isn’t a reliable source anywhere to cooborate this. Page protection isn’t going to be lifted to add in information we can’t back up. Please, if you’re going to use this talk page you gotta make your discussions constructive otherwise you’re just wasting your own time. Rusted AutoParts 03:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Then Why Are There Articles Saying This Coolguy3478 (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC) It’s called clickbait. It’s using anything they can to get people on their site to garner views and revenue despite using wonky evidence to support claims. Rusted AutoParts 05:18, 30 December 2018 (UTC) For the record, saying “It’s on Google News!” is functionally identical to “Rotten Tomatoes says…”. They’re both aggregates. Gathering results and reviews respectively from various sources. You have to cite it by the actual work. The fact that clickbait articles show up so easily for you, Coolguy might be something of a personal naïveté and gullibility problem--Fradio71 (talk) 06:36, 30 December 2018 (UTC) https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a870579/marvel-mcu-deceased-characters-returning-avengers-4/ Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Found A Source It Even Says "Sebastian Stan continued his spoilerific rampage (in the same interview with The Independent) when he confirmed that he'd also chewed the scenery with Samuel L Jackson for Avengers 4." Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Found Groot! https://fanfest.com/2018/12/14/was-that-a-dead-marvel-character-in-the-avengers-endgame-trailer/ Confirmed! Coolguy3478 (talk) 01:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Putting on the backburner the fact this is a non reliable source just speculating, why would Groot be on the Milano with Stark considering where he was at location wise and status wise in Infinity War? Rusted AutoParts 02:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC) He Was In The Trailer Though Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC) That’s a subjective opinion. Rusted AutoParts 02:43, 30 December 2018 (UTC) No It's A Fact That He's In The Trailer Coolguy3478 (talk) 03:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC) No it's speculation. Could just as easily be an Easter Island head, considering how blurry it is. --Ebyabe (talk) 03:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Groot doesn’t even have that headshape. This entire section is junk and has nothing to do with improving the article. No new information provided by it. The OP doesn’t even make a case for his point. Just “Yeah he is!” “It’s a fact!” “But he was!”, it just seems so childish--Fradio71 (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Found It!https://mobile.twitter.com/MCU_Tweets/status/923017774317953024 Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:22, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Groot is a CGI character, with a stock dialogue. Those are added to the film at the last minute. Cambalachero (talk) 11:14, 31 December 2018 (UTC) So Does That Count Coolguy3478 (talk) 14:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC) No. At this point, be patient. Assume everyone who appeared in Infinity War will appear in Endgame but restrain yourself from acting on those assumptions for just ~4 months when you can see him in the actual movie--Fradio71 (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC) OMG! Hugh Jackman Was Confirmed! Coolguy3478 (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC) By what reliable sources? And please stop capitalizing every word in a sentence. Thank you. --Ebyabe (talk) 18:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC) Did U Not See It In Google's News Coolguy3478 (talk) 18:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC) At this point I consider these posts disruptive and spammy. I’ve already asked you to make your contributions here constructive, I feel it’s eventually going to see your posts just go ignored because they’re not constructive or you may even be blocked. Rusted AutoParts 19:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC) I Give Up.If Hugh Jackman Shows Up,When I Watch It,U Will Let Me Add Him Coolguy3478 (talk) 01:05, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Nope. Not how it works. You know if Hugh Jackman was really showing up, legitimate news sources would be all over it. Or it's not something Marvel would let out at all. It's amazing how you went from "Hugh Jackman Was Confirmed!" to "If Hugh Jackman Shows Up". You're bullshitting and we all know it--Fradio71 (talk) 01:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Type Up Hugh Jackman Avengers Endgame,See What U Get Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:17, 31 December 2018 (UTC) He Is Confirmed BTW Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:18, 31 December 2018 (UTC) https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a25708540/hugh-jackman-avengers-endgame-appearance-google-search-fan-reactions/ Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2018 (UTC) There U Go Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Read the full article. It's not "he's in it" it's "is he in it? maybe." Endgame started filming a few months before the Disney/Fox merger was announced and ended a few months later. Probably not a lot of time to bring in someone big like that in the story.Crboyer (talk) 02:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Also it's not sourced. A Google collection doesn't confirm anything. Nor does your article. How it got there is unknown--Fradio71 (talk) 04:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC) file:///storage/emulated/0/Download/hughjackman%20(1).jpg What Movie Is There Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Copy And Paste It And U'll Find Out Coolguy3478 (talk) 02:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC) That looks to be a link to a file on your computer. Also, images can be photoshopped. Please provide an actual link, like you did to the Digital Spy article. --Ebyabe (talk) 04:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC) My guess is it's one of the tweets or images in the DigitalSpy article--Fradio71 (talk) 04:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC) That Ain't No Link,I Took It From The Article Coolguy3478 (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC) You took what from the article? All you put up was a file name with no formatting to even make what you took appear. Though you do imply I was correct, that it's an image of the collection. You still have nothing dude. You're not getting the article unprotected, not for your unsourced BS. Honestly I propose if you reply, you should be reported or your talk sections removed because they have been unproductive nonsense--Fradio71 (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Long story short: if you search for "Hugh Jackman" in google, it provides some basic info about the actor, including his films. "Endgame" is listed there. THAT IS ALL. A mere engine-generated automatic google result. It can likely be just a mistake (and it wouldn't be the first time). Cambalachero (talk) 10:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)