Talk:Superman (2025 film)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Superman (2025 film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Film: Comic book / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Comic book films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comics: DC Comics / Superman / Films Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Related work groups:
/
	This article is supported by DC Comics work group.
	This article is supported by Superman work group.
	This article is supported by Comic book films work group.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

They are finishing filming in a couple of weeks that is in July not august it’s been confirmed by production weekly and Gunn himself said it’s halfway way finished 92.239.22.2 (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done It is unclear what changes you specifically want to be made. Please provide a reliable source that verifies this information. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images

@BarntToust and Trailblazer101: thanks for adding in the new images, it's nice to have relevant ones to help illustrate the cast and set during filming. I do think there has been a bit too much back-and-forth editing over these in the last few days, it would be good to discuss further image changes at the talk page rather than continuing to change each other's edits so much. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had already discussed the image policy and not to use an excessive amount with BarntToust on their talk, though I will make sure to hold a more direct conversation here should this continue. Trailblazer101 (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trailblazer101 @Adamstom.97 Yeah, I added the daily planet standee and the other. I flew under the false flag of, "if it's directly relevant, it's good to use". we should definitely wait until more come out to consider having 3 rows like Skyfall#Filming] does. My bad on misreading that policy, I do apologize.

Also, since I have your attention, if a free image of Corenswet on set as Superman comes out, will we have to delete the James Gunn photo from fair use? is it importat as a marketing piece, or is it illustration on that basis of face value? thanks to the both of you! with much love, BarntToust (talk) 21:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not every image that is relevant to the film needs to be included in the article. We just want it to look visually pleasing for readers and to not overload it with too many images. This is not a gallery of set photos. I don't think the Superman image in "Marketing" should be deleted given it was the subject of critical commentary, which allows such non-free images to remain on the wiki. Plus, not all set photos are reflective of what will appear in the finished film. I think we are truly good on images in this article for the time being, especially in terms of those from the Cleveland set. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trailblazer101 Yeah, like how Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds had commentary on their suits. another project we work on mutually, Deadpool & Wolverine. We should write words in the caption box. I see IGN did an article --> the Superman Suit Probably Isn’t Even the Version You’ll See in Theaters - IGN and forbes Corenswet’s Superman Looks Fantastic In New Images, And The Suit Is Great on commentary. Feel free to use their commentary. BarntToust (talk) 00:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have enough coverage of the Superman suit in the "Marketing" section already, and I don't think we need to add anything more to the caption from what is already there. Trailblazer101 (talk) 08:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the Superman Shield in the infobox

Someone else has added the shield in the infobox now. @Trailblazer101, I'm going to have to disagree with you on removing it again. Captain America: Brave New World's infobox image is a poster featuring a shield and red Hulk hands, without even the movie logo. Logos for films are routinely used to illustrate the film before posters come out. This should be no different than the way it has been done. it sounds like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but it's the way things seem to be done. (Maybe rasterize it? My software was picking up on the dark blue shadow on the edges of the shield...) BarntToust (talk) 19:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I initially did not believe it was sufficient or necessary as it was just the same "logo" shown at CinemaCon. Realistically, this is not the true logo of the film that will be used as it is only the logo on Superman's suit. Once it was readded, I was not going to remove it again. I am well aware of the Captain America poster, which is an actual teaser poster whereas this Superman image is just the plain suit logo. We are also not going to alter any official images. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I saw that you non-free reduced its size. If we all agree, it's a great thing for it. Yep, all seems good. It's a film called just Superman, so I guess the of-the-same-name logo applies here, just not the wordmark, which probably will come out in the future. Yeah, I suppose rasterizing is not a good idea. All-in-all, take care Trailblazer! BarntToust (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem here? The official logo for the film has been released and added to the infobox until we get an actual poster. Nothing out of the ordinary. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with it, I was just initially unsure about it but changed my mind. Not sure why a discussion had to be made about it. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Gods and Monsters" link in header

Currently the "Gods and Monsters" link redirects to the main DCU page, which is already being linked to in the header. As such, it is irrelevant. I understand some wanting parity with MCU films which link to their respective Phases, except those pages currently exist. Until such a time that a "Chapter One" page is created and merits existing outside of the main DCU article, there is no reason to be redundant simply for the sake of desired clout. Buh6173 (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOTBROKEN, Redirects can indicate possible future articles and Shortcuts or redirects to embedded anchors or sections of articles or of Wikipedia's advice pages should never be bypassed, as the anchors or section headings on the page may change over time. Updating one redirect is far more efficient than updating dozens of piped links. This "Chapter One: Gods and Monsters" redirect is pointing readers directly to the dedicated section for this slate of content at the DCU article, and is therefore a helpful link to include as opposed to it just linking straight to the overall DCU article again (which it does not). This is not about being similar to the MCU articles (or alleged "clout"), this is about adequately directing our readers to a relevant section of an article via the redirect method, and this type of redirect linking is allowed and is not a WP:DUPLINK. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That still does not change that it's referred to twice, once at the top and once later on. If you must have both links, it should be phrased along the lines of "it will be the first film in the DC Universe (DCU) as a part of Chapter 1: Gods and Monsters) and a reboot of the Superman film series". Buh6173 (talk) 01:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have the lead structured as is so it presents the most relevant information first, as per WP:LEAD. There is nothing wrong with having a redirect linking to a section of an article that was already linked it, so it is just an issue of preference. This link can remain. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does, but it's also repetitive and redundant in the way it is currently structured, that's my point. Buh6173 (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not repetitive or redundant, the link may go to the same page but the text is providing different information each time. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It really isn't. It's two separate lines of "this is part of the DCU". How would rephrasing it in the way I suggested it make it worse? Buh6173 (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It adds unnecessary details to the opening paragraph. Not everything needs to go there, only the key things. And it is directly related to the film's release, which is appropriately discussed in the third paragraph of the lead. A change in release schedule will not impact the film's setting in the DCU, but it could impact its place in the Chapter. That is why the Phase details are mentioned after release for MCU articles, and the same principles apply here. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]