FANDOM


S.H.I.E.L.D. Playground
 
Welcome to the Playground! On top of being S.H.I.E.L.D.'s headquarters, this is also the general discussion page for the Marvel Cinematic Universe Wiki! The Playground is where this Wiki community comes together to organize and discuss projects for the Wiki. To see the most recent discussions, scroll down the page.


2071 the-avengers-prev
Archives

Promotional Images

By this conversation between me and Nerdtastic1221 we've came up with different views for the same problem. As noted by him most of the galleries here on the wiki have Promotional Still Images listed under Screenshots sections. Since I was the one of the main editors for the Spider-Man/Gallery page, I could shape it the wright way: by adding Still images under the proper Promotional section as they should be. By reading our conversation (and the links I showed him ) you can see that by definition Screenshots and Stills are different things. Nerdtastic1221 justified keeping things the way they are because that's the way we always did and that's why we shouldn't change. Several times we did structural changes here (for the best) and we also did changes that included editing lots and lots of articles (like the addition of the Citizenship and Affiliation categories). That's why I propose to proper rearrange the Gallery pages and rightfully ajust this little mistake we have on our wiki. I would be glad if I could count on your help like I did with the Citizenship and Affiliation categories since I'll need all of it.--Blaublau94 (talk) 17:04, August 7, 2017 (UTC)

SMH Promo Still 3

My argument is that this is a still image from a movie scene, it is a taken from a scene being filmed with the actors. In my mind this allows it to be included in the screenshots section. The screenshots section is for images from the movie/tv show scenes themselves, regardless if they were literally taken from the completed shot or not.

I believe the promotional section of the gallery should be reserved for posters or posed images of the cast.

Backing me up is the fact that in the wiki's entire history, these sorts or images have always been included in the screenshots section of the galleries.Nerdtastic1221 (talk) 17:28, August 7, 2017 (UTC)

There are things that don't have to be discussed. Definitions are what they are. And any image that appears in a movie or TV episode is an screenshot, no matter if it was taken from the released media, or by Marvel prior to the release...--Shabook (talk) 17:43, August 7, 2017 (UTC)
Except this image does not appear in a TV episode or a movie. They are set photo, they have different angles and cuts and light and are not representative of the final product.--Elledy92 (talk) 10:49, August 8, 2017 (UTC+1)
Agreed. Set photos such as the one shown above with Ned Leeds and Peter Parker should be categorized under "stills"; if anything, however, it would still fall under "Promotional" rather than "Screenshots". Murali9395 (talk) 14:37, August 8, 2017 (UTC)

I would say there's a difference between a set picture and a still, and a still has more relevance in the screenshots section. I honestly believe that the promotional section should be reserved for posters, and cast photoshoots like the recent ones from the Inhumans. On another point, for ease of use on this wiki, it is vastly easier to find a still image from a movie/tv scene when it's in the screenshots section in the correct order. And as Shabook says, why does anyone want to try and redefine this? If anything should be changed (which it doesn't need to), then perhaps consider changing the word screenshots to stills, but that is still basically pointless.Nerdtastic1221 (talk) 15:36, August 8, 2017 (UTC)

Or maybe there should be a section for "stills" as well as a section for "screenshots", with the latter being classified for actual screenshots taken from the film. And this way, the "promotional" section is reserved for posters, magazine artwork, etc. Adding another header isn't going to be too difficult or a waste of time, even. And it does smooth this issue out, does it not? Murali9395 (talk) 15:40, August 8, 2017 (UTC)
There isn't much of a difference between a still and a set photo. They are the same thing. The difference between a screenshot and a still is the first one is a frame taken from a video, the latter is a photo taken from video. There is no need to create a "stills" paragraph, but they certanly fall more under the category of promotional material. Elledy92 (talk) 19:23, August 8, 2017 (UTC+1)

I agree with Blaublau94. Just because the wiki has always done something doesn't mean it needs to stay that way. Stills released by Marvel are mostly set photos (the ones that aren't are usually the ones that have CGI, in which case they are actually screencaps). By the strictest definitions of canon, which is what we usually abide by, set photos would therefore not be canon and shouldn't appear in screenshots or on in universe pages and should just be in the promotional galleries. Coluanprime (talk) 18:17, August 9, 2017 (UTC)

IF the "still" does not literally appear the same way in the movie/tv-show, it should not be in screenshots, if it does (like a lot of them do) it could fit as a screenshot. But if making this change could lead to "stills" that match "screenshots" could end up not falling under screenshots, even though they technicaly are, I dont agree with the change, because that wont mean fixing a mistake, but just changing a mistake. Atleast they should not end up in the set photos.TomasDerksen (talk) 20:24, August 11, 2017 (UTC)
But still hardly cannot be mistaken for screenshots. Sometimes they appear similar, maybe shots in a similar angle, but lights and cuts are usually different. I think that cannot be mistaken. Elledy92 (talk) 23:51, August 11, 2017 (UTC+1)

Mythological Characters Category

I was thinking that, since a lot of characters that are consider mythological exists in the MCU, like Bast and Hanuman, but even "physical" characters like Thor and Loki, the category "Mythological Characters" could be created (since Characters suitable in this case). --Elledy92 (Elledy92) 11:17, February 28, 2018 (UTC)

Medicines Category

I'd like to suggest the creation of a category for Medicines, as a subcategory of Items. This category could at least include GH.325, Ghost Infection Antidote, Terrigenesis Vaccine, Rapid Bone-Healing Pills, Resurrection Elixir and Sufentanil. I'm not sure whether the Tetrodotoxin B would fall into this.--TraceFinder (talk) 12:45, March 9, 2018 (UTC)

This sounds like a good category / subcategory of items to me. There appears to be enough articles based of what you mentioned and I’m sure there will be more in the future. It’s also a distinct and easily understandable category. Lol pie (talk) 15:49, May 20, 2018 (UTC)

Category for Actors with Upcoming Roles

Could we have a category for actors whose characters have not yet appeared? Examples being Walton Goggins and Laurence Fishburne. At the very least, these actors should be in the Upcoming Content category. TheRadion (talk) 00:55, March 28, 2018 (UTC)

Category for Cloak and Dagger's visions

I think "Probed" fits the description of what Cloak and Dagger do to their targets when they use their perception powers. I would like to propose two new categories:

  • Characters Probed by Cloak
  • Characters Probed by Dagger

Thoughts? Sirenhound (talk) 11:34, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

Gifs

Is there a specific reason the wiki doesn't seem to use gifs outside of the spoiler tag? (moving images if there's anyone who doesn't know) If there isn't I feel it'd be a good way to show powers in action among other things in comparison to still images. SwagMasterDbl (talk) 05:11, April 2, 2018 (UTC)

Alternate Reality for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Future

Now that Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D./Season Five is over, it is clear without a doubt that episodes Orientation Part One to Past Life all take place in an alternate bad future. That means that every character that first appear in them, such as Deke Shaw, Flint or Sinara are not from the main MCU timeline, but more importantly, the characters who got into that future by taking the slow path (Leo Fitz, Elena Rodriguez, Robin Hinton) are going to have different lives from now on, requiring to split their articles into alternate counterparts. Should we treat it like Framework and create alternate selves pages for everyone involved, including alternate histories of events, locations and objects? HBK123 (talk) 09:52, May 19, 2018 (UTC)

The only characters that need alternate articles are the ones seen in The Last Day, which includes Leo Fitz' version, and Robin Hinton. For now, the Fitz we saw returning to the past until The End will be treated as the one and the same in the main article. No other articles need splitting, items, events and locations, even the Lighthouse, don't need an alternate article. Use the Framework situation as a template for how to deal with alternate realities.--Shabook (talk) 11:08, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
There are however different articles for vehicles and locations of the Framework. There is a different article for the Zephyr One, for example. Or even Washington D.C.--Elledy92 (talk) 11:48, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
And what articles would need alternate articles? Certainly not the future characters. And not the items, because no matter their different history, items like the Odium are exactly the same item, unlike Framework items which were digital recreations, not the same item.--Shabook (talk) 11:59, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I agree that items like the Odium or the Kree Battle Axe shouldn't be changed, since they are generic items. But important vehicles and locations like the Zephyr One of the Lighthouse should be splitted since they have a different story in the alternate future (the Lightouse being essentially turned into a space station).
Both the Lighthouse and the Zephyr One are the same physical items, with just another history in the ELE future.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)

Also, What about merging all the timeline page after 2018 (related to this new timeline), into a single page about the events of the "Earth Destroyed Timeline"? --Elledy92 (talk) 12:05, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
Speaking strictly from an administrative POV, and not my personal opinion which I will keep for myself, timeline articles are fanon content right now, and all information is, or should be, available in the rest of well-sourced articles of this wiki.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I don't understand what the answer is to the question about page-moving, though. Is there going to be one collective page as Elledy has suggested? And which point is the wiki considering to be the point of divergence? When the team return from the future, when Coulson decides to slip the Centipede serum into Daisy's gauntlets, or something like that? It can't just be that when the team transported into the future they went into an alternate timeline, because otherwise Fitz could not have slept 74 years from the present into that future. The White Monolith might be considered capable of switching between timelines, but going to sleep isn't.BEJT (talk) 21:06, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
And that is something that we won't know for now, and we will probably have to wait until Season 6, which means more than a year. Marvel's rules for future timelines are that every alternate future is set actually in an alternate reality. That the ELE future is an alternate reality is not questionable anymore...--Shabook (talk) 21:16, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
OK, I think I get you. What does ELE stand for? And what do you suggest should be the existing articles? For example: "2017" showing both "2018" and "Earth Destroyed Timeline" (or whichever title) as "After"? Then 2018 just including this timeline's events and everything going forwards, and "Earth Destroyed Timeline" including the way things went down in the bad timeline, and the 2091-set episodes' events? Or at the point of divergence in 2018 a note referring to the other page? Basically, do you have an opinion on which pages should exist, and how it should be structured?BEJT (talk) 21:23, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
ELE stands for Extinction Level Event. Timeline for the altenate future should be condensed into a single article, similar to Before 20th Century. Not sure about the name yet.--Shabook (talk) 21:34, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
OK, cool. Just say whenever you think of a title. The only thing I wouldn't use is "Alternate" or "Alternative" because that suggests it was never going to be the case - but it was the original timeline and this new one is the change, as shown by Fitz's sleep and Robin feeling the shift to a new timeline. I might suggest "Original Timeline Future" or "Destroyed Earth Timeline Future" or "Lighthouse Timeline Future".BEJT (talk) 01:18, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

That the future the S.H.I.E.L.D. team saw at the beginning of Season Five was bad, there's no doubt about that. But that it was alternate - nope! Technically, it was the original future, the future that happened, the future they lived in. By changing the past (defeating Talbot) they have created an alternate timeline, a timeline they're now living in.--UskokS.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters - Playground 13:28, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
Technically, if the current reality is going to still be Earth-199999 (which is a fact, as Marvel Studios shoots down anything so ambitious from Marvel Television), then the future where Earth is destroyed is an alternate reality with another numerical designation.--Shabook (talk) 13:39, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I understand that Shabook, but I feel Uskok is right since Fitz fell asleep in the present day and slept through into the future. The White Monolith might be considered capable of switching between timelines, but going to sleep isn't. As well as this, Robin feels the shift from the original timeline to the new timeline. Is it possible however that since time is fluid, according to Simmons at the end of the episode, that Earth-199999 is the final, cemented timeline in the MCU, but the alternative futures essentially get discarded as different designations?BEJT (talk) 21:06, May 19, 2018 (UTC)