Talk:Marvel Studios Animation

AFC submission comment

This draft is a draft on a subtopic of an existing article, Marvel Studios. Discussion as to whether a separate article for the subtopic is warranted should be on the talk page of the parent article, Talk:Marvel Studios.

Please discuss the suitability of creating a separate subtopic article on the talk page of the parent article. Please resubmit this draft if there is rough consensus at the parent talk page to create the child article, or with an explanation that the child draft satisfies either general notability on its own or a special notability guide. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Note: this comment existed on the draft article and was moved from it to the talk page with this edit. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Move?

After Trailblazer101's cleanup, this feels possibly ready for mainspace, should we feel it is appropriate to move it there. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Looks good to me, I think it would be fine to move it. -- Zoo (talk) 18:32, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I think my cleanup put it in a good position for a move. I was also looking into adjusting the projects table and adding new pieces of info on Alonso, but a move can be made regardless of those. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Just saw Favre beat me to the new Alonso bits! But yeah, I was thinking a revised table could help, though it's not something I am too concerned about. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:32, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I also agree with moving. Great job, Trail! InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Also agreed on moving to mainspace, looks pretty good. — SirDot (talk) 00:05, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

 Moved - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Brian Kesinger series

According to Brian Kesinger on Linkedin, the animated series he was working on got canceled. And by using a Linkedin date extractor (since Linkedin itself doesn't display exact dates) it can be seen that he made the post in October, just a month after he announced his hiring. If this is sufficient, this and the other articles that mention it should probably be adjusted accordingly. Aldwiki1 (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

One needs a Linkedin account to view that, so I don't know how good it is to feature as a citation (especially since it's a self published one). While we should remove table mentions etc., prose should stay, but I don't know how to go about sourcing this without using Linkedin. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I've thrown the URL into Wayback Machine (which is still taking ungodly long to archive). If that can archive it an the post appears in the archive, then I'd feel better about using the Linkedin link. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

If Wayback Machine doesn't work, archive.today managed to get a snapshot of it. Aldwiki1 (talk) 23:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Wayback didn't. So since it is archived on archive.today and can be viewed, we can probably go about updating things. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Removed from the table here, with the cancelation noted in prose here. Outright removed from the List of TV series article and the Phase Seven draft. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Logo

Thoughts on uploading and using the "animated" Marvel Studios logo here? This has been used for What If and I Am Groot. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Works for me. I think it makes more sense to use that than the current infobox logo. -- ZooBlazer^talk 01:59, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Do we think as it is is enough to a satisfy it being uploaded to Commons? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:06, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm still learning the specifics of image licenses in terms of Commons, though I support using the animated Marvel Studios logo on this article. I think because it has a background and all (including the D+ logo in the top right corner; which I know can be easily cropped out), it may be best to stick with uploading it here for now. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I think to be safe, it can be uploaded here (with the top black bars cropped). I don't think it would meet the threshold of originality needed for commons. I can get working on the upload of it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Overlink

I don't believe that the Type should say "Division". I believe it should say "Division" like every other article about divisions. I see where there can be conflict. You edit articles on Marvel, I edit articles on Business. The Overlink guide doesn't list division or anything else really about business. This is really confusing me at the moment as I barely understand why it needed to be reverted in the first place. WiinterU (talk) 12:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

What to do

It seems unlikely that the "Marvel Animation" producing X-Men '97 is the same company as the old Marvel Animation, so this may be a similar situation to Marvel Music vs. Marvel Music (record label) where we need either a new redirect or move. There are two possibilities: either they are doing this temporarily to firmly convey that this series is not MCU, in which case a redirect or pipe is all we need; or, this will be the new name for Marvel Studios' animation arm, in which case we should consider a move. I say "consider" rather than an instant move because there are other considerations like WP:NATURAL and WP:OFFICIALNAME. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

It could be the logo is simply shoeing an abbreviated versiin kf the name. For example, the Walt Disney Pictures logo now only says "Disney" yet the division itself hasn't changed names. Maybe is the same thing here. BestDaysofMusic (talk) 17:09, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain it is Marvel Studios Animation given the logo looks exactly like Marvel Studios, only with Animation in place of Studios. Just felt like a short hand name, though I think there should be some mention to this in the article, as well as possibly adding that new logo here too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I concur with those assessments. The official, formal name is "Marvel Studios Animation", branding for trailers, etc. wouldn't change that. We may want to consider adding the logo (as seen here, if needed) to this article in reference to its use in X-Men '97, though I strongly think the article title should remain in tact per NATURAL and OFFICIALNAME and that redirects such as Marvel Animation (studio), Marvel Animation (studios unit)?, Marvel Animation (division) (given MSA is a division while MA is a subsidiary), or the less acceptable Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios), etc. could be created. I think it may be too early to make a DAB page for "Marvel Animation" if the primary topic may change, though that might not hurt eventually. I do also want to see what the logo display is in the series, though I doubt that would change anything. Even though Marvel.com and the trailer uses "Marvel Animation's X-Men '97", it is just a shorter way to say Marvel Studios Animation's, and the MS logo is still used in the logo. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I've added in some prose to try and convey this. I also agree that it's possible this is being done to convey the series not being in the MCU. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, we now have a press release:

ABOUT MARVEL ANIMATION

Marvel Animation is an award-winning studio dedicated to creating original animated series inspired by over 85 years of Marvel storytelling. Shows include “What If…?,” “I Am Groot” and the upcoming “X-Men ’97,” among others. Marvel Animation is part of Marvel Studios.

So it's 100% Marvel Studios Animation, the same studio behind previous MCU animated projects, and it doesn't look like the name is just being used for stylization purposes. I guess we'll have to see what sources use? By the way, @Facu-el Millo (or anyone else with graphic design as their passion), are you able to Photoshop out a transparent version of File:Marvel Studios Animation logo 2024.jpg like you did with the One-Shots? InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus: So with the press release, do we think this is a formal name change now (or possible announcement)? Outside of the SDCC panels (and the Vulture article) I don't actually the animation arm was ever formally announced. I looked at the What If press stuff and they didn't have any animation about sections within them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I personally think so, especially considering "Marvel Studios Animation" has never been used in an official capacity, but I don't know about others. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Ha, it turns out the term may have already been in use since last December. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Well then, that does provide more insight into this being a potential change or more official name for this unit. The project profile also lists "Marvel Animation" as the production company. I can try to see what I can do with the logo in Photoshop here. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@Trailblazer101: regarding the image, I just cropped it from the 97 logo on the press site. So if you want to do that yourself to get a better "sample" as it were, try that. I also don't love the crop job I did. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a duplicate discussion on this at the Marvel Animation article for those who are interested. Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus:, I already uploaded and added the new logo. —El Millo (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, El Millo! Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:12, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

If we do want to make moves, I think this should become Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios) and what is currently Marvel Animation should go to Marvel Animation (Marvel Entertainment) (and then make the non dab'd page a disambiguation page). I think trying to use "division" and "subsidiary" as the dab names would get too confusing. Thoughts? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I tried to come up with something more generic (per WP:NCDAB, which says to avoid proper nouns if possible), but I've got nothing. I guess there's Marvel Animation (established 2008) and Marvel Animation (established 202?), but that may be confusing as well. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually, the Marvel Entertainment unit can be naturally disambiguated as Marvel Animation, Inc. (assuming the lead citation, a dead link, is accurate). InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

The "Inc" one feels like it could still cause confusion. We do have some precedence with using "Marvel Studios" as a dab for our TV cast list (List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors (Marvel Television) and List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors (Marvel Studios)) so I think it would be acceptable. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I think most of those options could work as helpful redirects though if nothing else really sticks, I think using "Marvel Studios" as the DAB would do just fine, though wouldn't NATURAL prefer "Marvel Studios Animation" as to avoid repeating "Marvel" so close together? (Not saying I'm against it, just curious.) Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree that having the name currently would be an easy way to disambiguate, but if the division is taking simply "Marvel Animation" as its name, we should probably reflect the actual title as that. It's tricky for sure. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Is the first studio still active? The article isn't clear about that. If it isn't then using the years can also work, so Marvel Animation (2008–2019) (not sure what the end date is) and Marvel Animation (2023–present). Gonnym (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they are/have been working on Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Yup. Marvel Animation is currently under Marvel Studios and still exists as far as we know. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Even if we were to keep Marvel Studios Animation where it is, we would still have to move Marvel Animation somewhere. Readers may be expecting information about the studio behind X-Men '97 and be WP:ASTONISHed to arrive at an article about the studio behind the Disney Channel cartoons.

This isn't ideal, but what if... we merged the two articles together? They're both part of Marvel Studios now, and the general public likely isn't aware of the distinction between the two. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:54, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Technically, per recent sources on the studio transfer, Marvel Animation is known as "Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment" here or just "Marvel Family Entertainment" as detailed in the Marvel Animation article. Marvel Family Entertainment is actually called the animation arm by THR, Collider, CNBC, CNN, and Variety. That would be a more natural disambiguation for that division. To err on the side of caution with WP:RECENTISM, "Marvel Animation" should likely become a DAB page (there are other relevant Marvel animated articles to link to) and we keep "Marvel Studios Animation" as the title and use redirects and hatnotes to help distinguish the correlation between the companies. I don't think merging these articles would be beneficial to readers and could actually cause more confusion. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Also to note, "Marvel Animation Studios" is also a redirect and should remain pointed to Marvel Animation (especially should that become "Marvel Family Entertainment". Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97, ZooBlazer, and BD2412: Do you have any thoughts on how we should disambiguate Marvel Animation and Marvel Studios Animation, which are now both known as "Marvel Animation"? InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I feel like it's rather artificial to treat these as two separate entities, and not a continuation of a single entity. BD2412 T 18:12, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

At the moment, I think doing it the same way as the TV series actor lists would work with the (Marvel Studios) and (Marvel Entertainment) dabs. Unless we just keep as is to distinguish the two. -- ZooBlazer 18:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I also thought the (Marvel Entertainment) and (Marvel Studios) disambiguation made sense. It seemed odd that they would both be existing at the same time so I took a look at some press releases for Moon Girl and the current Spidey show and neither of them mention Marvel Animation, they are both credited to Disney Branded Television, while we have different sources using Marvel Studios, Marvel Studios Animation, and Marvel Animation interchangeably for the Disney+ animated series. That suggests to me that we are right to keep the two articles separate and have the old Marvel Animation winding up / merging with Disney under Marvel Studios, at which point the new Marvel Studios Animation is created with people from Marvel Studios and they eventually simplify the name to Marvel Animation. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I did some further investigation, and it's pretty confusing. According to Cort Lane's (the Kevin Feige of Marvel Animation) LinkedIn page, his title was SVP of "Animation & Family Entertainment" at Marvel Entertainment, but he also led "Marvel Animation Studios". Per Marvel.com, it appears the division's formal title really is "Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment" (this Deadline source can be used as a third-party ref, if needed). But the article's lead says "Marvel Animation, Inc.", which implies a subsidiary rather than a division; the citation is a dead link, but the archived page confirms this name (minus the comma, so I've adjusted the lead). Season 3 of Spider-Man (2017 TV series), released in 2020, was produced by "Marvel Animation". Moon Girl and Spidey and His Amazing Friends said produced by "Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment" when they were announced in 2019 [1] [2], but switched to produced by "Disney Television Animation" or "Disney Junior and Marvel Entertainment" by the time the series were completed, and for subsequent seasons [3] [4]. Marvel HQ has a YouTube playlist titled "Marvel Animation" that includes both the Disney Channel shows and I Am Groot, but "animation" may be used generically here. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I found additional sources for the "Family Entertainment" names, as I noted above, and I think that would be a more accurate title for this article. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

There is also a "Marvel Animation" tab on D+ which just covers all Marvel animated content, so it's not like that name is being used exclusively for the former Marvel Ent. unit. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for all the great research everyone! Based on what was found, I think Marvel Animation should become a dab, that article should go to Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment, and this article either stays as is or moves to Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios). Is that kind of how it all seems to be heading towards? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I would agree with that analysis. I'm not a fan of the parenthesis for Marvel Animation given it would be repeating "Marvel" so close together and I think "Marvel Studios Animation" should remain the title with the alternate title as a redirect, same with "Marvel Family Entertainment". Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Just to play some devil's advocate and to get insight, how then would you handle the wording of the lead if we keep this article at "Marvel Studios Animation" and it is formally "Marvel Animation"? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad you asked! The lead could read "Marvel Animation (formerly and also known as Marvel Studios Animation)" given both names are used to refer to this company unit. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Break

Where do we stand on this? Do we want to make any moves to both Animation articles? Only one? None? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I still support moving Marvel Animation to Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment and leaving Marvel Studios Animation at its current title per WP:NATURAL (and given it is difficult to pinpoint which one is the WP:COMMONNAME) with Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios) and other potential variables as a redirect there, along with the creation of a DAB page at "Marvel Animation". Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I think that all makes sense for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

That sounds good to me as well. -- ZooBlazer 19:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'm with everybody else when it comes to "Marvel Animation & Family Animation", but I'm still on the fence with "Marvel Studios Animation" since it's a name used only by a handful of sources whose number is likely to taper off substantially now that we have an official name. I should also note that regardless of where we move these pages, they should be piped as [[Marvel Animation & Family Animation|Marvel Animation]] and [[Marvel Studios Animation|Marvel Animation]]. It is sometimes editors' instinct to automatically use the article title in prose, even when an extended form is being used solely for natural disambiguation purposes. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:36, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I think I'm with Infinite that leaving this page at "Marvel Studios Animation" doesn't feel the best for the reasons they laid out. I'm leaning towards "Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios)" as the title I think I'd prefer. And no issue moving the old one to "Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Since there is disagreement, we could just have a formal RM to see where non-taskforce editors stand. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. Would it just be for this article since we all seem to be in agreement on moving the other (though that should be noted in the RM)? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Yep. Would you like to do the honors? InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 27 February 2024

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus for any proposed solution - renaming, merging, disambiguating - and some commentary to the effect that it is fine leaving things as they are for future reconsideration. BD2412 T 17:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

---

Marvel Studios Animation → Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios) – It has recently been revealed that this division (until now known as "Marvel Studios Animation" from a Vulture report), is formally known as "Marvel Animation". Given Marvel Animation already exists for the entity that primarily existed under Marvel Entertainment, some alternate names are necessary. Consensus has been formed to move the existing Marvel Animation to Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment, and arguments have been made that keeping this at "Marvel Studios Animation" provides a WP:NATURAL disambiguation. However, given this is no longer the name the division is being referred to, I and others (namely InfiniteNexus) believe the base title should be simply "Marvel Animation". The dab of "(Marvel Studios)" was suggested following a similar dab used to disambiguate the List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors (both List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors (Marvel Television) and List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors (Marvel Studios)). Additional thoughts and comments are desired on how best to handle this article's name. It is understood that regardless what happens, piping will be necessary for both this and the other entity's linking across the site. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 11:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Television has been notified of this discussion. Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Animation has been notified of this discussion. Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Honestly I think they should be merged. Why would there be 2 Marvel Animation(s)? Everyone (including Disney) has said “Marvel Animation’s X-Men ‘97”. 320th Century (talk) 12:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Per the above discussion where more details are provided, they are two completely separate entities with no relation to each other outside of their "common" name now. Merging is not the answer as they are separate topics. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Merging IS the answer. There aren’t 2 Warner Bros. Animations. There’s “Warner Bros. Animation” and “Warner Bros. Pictures Animation”. There’s also “Walt Disney Animation Studios” and “Disney Television Animation”. Both Marvel & Disney have referred to this division, “Marvel Studios Animation”, as just “Marvel Animation”. Merge them already….. 320th Century (talk) 17:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

But they are two different entities. We don't combine information on two different things just because they have the same name. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. It would be like merging 2 filmmakers' 0ages because they have the same name. BestDaysofMusic (talk) 17:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

What is the official name?DoctorHver (talk) 20:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@DoctorHver: For the one this article is about, "Marvel Animation". The previous one's is "Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment", commonly referred to as "Marvel Animation". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I would recomend the offical names to be used in both cases. Even if that require some articles to be moved.Only times articles should be called name (diffrenator) if two or more things have the same name.

I would also like to point out that the copyright notice for the current Marvel Animation (which this article here is about) use Marvel Animation while " Marvel Animation & Family Entertainment" use "Marvel Entertainment and its subdisaries" for some reason. DoctorHver (talk) 04:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Support - do it, it's better this way101.115.178.179 (talk) 01:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The "Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man" website also has that logo, so it serms official. That's the name. BestDaysofMusic (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The name is not in doubt. It's what the article title ought to be. If others feel strongly for "Marvel Animation (Marvel Studios)" being the title, then I won't stand in the way, though I'm still iffy with using that as the disambiguator and caution it should not become a common go-to practice. (I'm also not exactly fond of this being taken to an RM over continued further natural discussion, though putting that aside.) I still think Marvel Studios Animation is more direct and less confusing than a title with two instances of "Marvel" in it in close proximity and some oddly placed parenthesis. For all we know, Marvel Studios Animation could be a more official/legal name while Marvel Animation could be a d/b/a name. Without much insight into how these are specifically used outside of Marvel's own usage, I find it difficult to make a call on which one is more prominent. I also want to point to WP:NAMECHANGES which states that third-party independent usage of the new name ought to be proven (ie "Marvel Animation" being used more than "Marvel Studios Animation"), and I don't think press releases in third-party refs (like ComicBook.com which occasionally uses them) qualify under this. We have a very solid source saying "Marvel Studios Animation" was the division's name last year, and yet the only sources for the "Marvel Animation" usage post-name change are essentially one-off mentions and Marvel and Disney-affiliated press mentions. We also ought to use more commonly recognized names, and I would argue "Marvel Studios Animation" is more easily recognizable with the Marvel Studios brand than the more ambiguous "Marvel Animation" is. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

We could always leave this one here for a bit and re-assess once there are more sources out there, but we should still move the old Marvel Animation page. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

I would be fine with that. I have no opposition to moving the old Marvel Animation article and getting a DAB page made to help with navigation and clarity. I just don't think we should be rushing a title change just yet. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

In that case, I think it would be more productive to change the name to "Marvel Animation (division)" and "Marvel Animation (subsidiary)" since those names would be much clearer in their nature. BestDaysofMusic (talk) 11:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't think those are enough of a clear disambiguation and could only add to confusion for those who may be unfamiliar with how the business operations work, let alone if those respective operating labels are even adequately sourced within the Marvel Studios article or their respective ones. I did consider them briefly early on, though I wouldn't rule them out as quickly as some others. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Immersive Story

Did anyone else notice that the trailer for What If...? – An Immersive Story (congratulations to the three people who get to experience this) still uses the "animated" version of the Marvel Studios logo rather than the new Marvel Animation logo that is supposed to appear before all animated projects going forward? Official sites [5] [6] credit Marvel Studios rather than Marvel Animation. I don't know if we need to adjust any of our wording (such as the image caption that says Animated version of the Marvel Studios logo that appeared in the division's projects until 2023). InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It is a tad bit peculiar, though I think it could be because this is closely related to What If...? and since that used the prior intro, this one did too. While it is odd the new Marvel Animation logo isn't present in the trailer and the banner isn't mentioned, it could still be in the credits (if anyone will be able to get it). If this intro starts to be used for the other upcoming series, like Eyes of Wakanda or Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man but not in others, than it may be worth exploring further. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I interpreted it as the fact that What If so far has used the Marvel Studios name and intro that this (and season 3) likely will still have that. But any new series going forward would have the Marvel Animation name. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Mission Demolition

Are you sure we shouldn't include "Lego Marvel Avengers: Mission Demolition"? Because the official Marvel and Atomic Cartoons websites clearly state is a Marvel Studios production. Plus, it was promoted in Marvel Studios' Twitter account. BestDaysofMusic (talk) 20:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I think we can use some logic and common sense to apply that the Marvel Studios entires for this are referring to its Animation mini-studio, similar to the Iron Man and Spidey Friends series. Strange that this one is now under Studios while Code Red was not, despite it also being advertised on the studio's social media. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

So, we should or shouldn't? BestDaysofMusic (talk) 11:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)