Welcome to my Talk Page! If you are leaving a note, please remember to be civil and not to include any personal attacks, and please remember to sign your message. I am not available all the time, due to my personal life, so I shall try to reach back to you at a reasonable time. My time zone is displayed on my userpage for reference. For any barnstar and holiday messages, go here, and for any automatic MCU task force messages, go here

Wow! You write fast! I'm a little distracted, but don't think I'd get all that content in nearly that amount of time. I don't start many articles. Anyway, just saying I'm impressed, and thanks for filling so much out! -2pou (talk) 19:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome. I'm not one who usually fleshes out articles like that, but even I am surprised by how fast I got that one made. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page stalker) Thank you both for getting this started! 2pou, at least for MCU-related articles, a lot of new drafts can copy/paste material that's similar across all the series, which makes them so quick to get started! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article used in the reference says nothing about him being in the sequel. It just uses the first one as an example of him playing the villain. Noahsolomonofficial (talk) 01:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was not the one who added the info, but to let you know, at the time of its addition, the article stated he was in "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness". It has since changed that, so the article will reflect that now. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Trailblazer, hope you're doing well. I noticed you're reverting a lot of things as WP:OVERLINKs recently. Sorry for being pedantic, but just clarifying OVERLINK is meant to refer to things that shouldn't really be linked even once because people understand them (e.g. United States, New York City). The policy for repeated links is WP:DUPLINK. It's just we should point these editors to DUPLINK in case they go to WP:OVERLINK and don't understand why they were wrong. Thanks. IronManCap (talk) 12:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, my mistake. Thanks for pointing that out to me. Trailblazer101 (talk) 13:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Trailblazer101: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ★Trekker (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022!

Hello Trailblazer101, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2022. Happy editing, InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply] Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to other user talk pages.

Merry Clint-mas, Trailblazer101! Here's to a 2022 full of madness! InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

—El Millo (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding ((subst:Happy holidays)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022!

Hello Trailblazer101, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2022. Happy editing, — Starforce13 16:26, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply] Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to other user talk pages.

— Starforce¹³ 16:26, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022!

Hello Trailblazer101, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2022. Happy editing, JOEBRO64 16:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply] Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to other user talk pages.

Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding ((subst:Xmas2)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas 2021

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding ((Subst:Xmas4)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year!

Trailblazer101,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Centcom08 (talk) 23:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages.

Hey Trail! Was just looking over your user page, and just wanted to let you know the colors you have in your infobox are not MOS:COLOR compliant, and, personally it was a bit hard for me to make out your content in there! It's obviously your page to do as you wish, but just wanted to give you a friendly heads up, if you want others to see the info on you! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aww, thank you for pointing this out to me. I honestly forgot the color combination I was looking for, and of course I want others to read what I have here. Thank you so much for pointing this out to me! Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure thing! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since when does a normal edit require a "consensus or prior discussion for this change". I was only trying to WP:Be Bold. Extended confirmed protection​ does not grant you this. -RoyGoldsmith (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The current formatting there was agreed upon by the MCU taskforce for how to best present the Phase contents. If you feel that a change or improvement is needed, it is best to discuss this on the talk page before pursuing an edit, to change prior consensus on how we present the material. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:Be Bold encourages all editors fix spelling, grammar or layout themselves, without reference to the talk page. You seem to think that "the MCU taskforce" has the power to override this Wikipedia editing guideline.

Please direct me to whatever text establishes "the current formatting agreed upon by the MCU taskforce for how to best present the Phase contents". What is the MCU taskforce? How many members does it have and why does it have any more authority than a group of individual editors trying form a consensus?

If you can't do this, please put back my changes and then we can talk. This is the proper way of tackling a change that you don't like. RoyGoldsmith (talk) 22:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you made a BOLD edit in what you thought was an improvement, and you were reverted by me as I did not believe it was an improvement nor that the current formatting (which has long been in place) was in need of any change. If an edit is disagreed upon, the WP:STATUSQUO is restored while the editors involved discuss the edits and what can be done to find a common change. Since you asked, the Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force is a group of Wikipedia editors overseeing these MCU articles. I myself do not believe the taskforce inherently "overrides" Wikipedia' guidelines, simply put, we follow them to a specific degree. Generally, suppose there is an issue on an MCU article covered by the taskforce. In that case, it is best to bring it up on that article's talk page where other taskforce members or frequent MCU article editors are likely to discuss it over and come to a consensus. I do not have a link to a specific discussion of why we use the current formatting that we do, as you requested, but I am just one editor who does not represent the taskforce and other MCU editors at large, so I can only speak for myself. Through several edits that have been made to the MCU article, it had been decided to stick to the WP:LEAD wording rather than a bulleted list. The wording is easily readable and the changes you proposed in your edit I feel left some of the wording explaining the Phases and the Infinity Saga with one-liners, which is generally not proper formatting. It is also not good practice to state to another editor "If you can't do this, please put back my changes and then we can talk", which is not how this process proceeds per the guidelines I linked at the start, and for me, raises potential WP:OWN issues. If you would like to raise this further, I would suggest discussing this at Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe, as making a change to a pre-established formatting on such a large article (and arguably making it longer) is controversial, especially if others don't see it as an improvement. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is the pertinent part of WP:STATUSQUO:

During a dispute discussion, until a consensus is established, you should not revert away from the status quo ante bellum (except (a) in cases where contentious material should be immediately removed, such as (i) biographies of living people or (ii) material about living people in other articles), or (b) external links). Instead, insert an appropriate tag indicating the text is under discussion. This process is meant for managing resolution of disputes while discussion is taking place. It is not appropriate to use reversion to control the content of an article through status quo stonewalling.

Also, I do not see anything about the wording in lists in WP:LEAD. -RoyGoldsmith (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page stalker) But the status quo ante bellum is the state of the article before your changes, not after. You're supposed to follow WP:BRD and discuss your proposed changes on the article talk page (preferrably not here, where there are not many watchers). Also, please see WP:IMPLICITCONSENSUS regarding your question as to what discussion previously established this consensus. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:40, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK. My main objection is that the current text has two paragraphs describing three subjects: Phases 1, 2 and 3. Either they should be combined into one 'graph (along with Phase 4) or split up into three. I think bullet points are better in this case but if you have a rule I'm not going to argue. -RoyGoldsmith (talk) 15:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you feel that is a change that ought to be discussed, feel free to do so at Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe. Civil debates are open, but those are best at the wider subject article's talk and not to remain here, where not much can be done. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where should Echo be at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force/Good Topic status? I was going to place it in Films & TV (Phase Four) but this isn't part of Phase 4. — SirDot (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hm, this is an interesting situation. I would suggest placing Echo in the "Marvel Cinematic Universe television series", probably just after the Phase Four listing, but not bulleted obviously, until such a time we know what group it is part of. It won't need its own tab until we get a lot more for it. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This current placement good? — SirDot (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks good to me. Nice job. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just saw many of your edits. That's great you've gotten a subscription! That should be really helpful for as long as you hold it. And Madame Web has Feige on it?! That was surprising! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you! I got tired of seeing Production Weekly's untapped potential and stuff not always being reported on, so I figured I'd get a subscription. I've got the monthly one, and it sure has paid off! The Madame Web stuff was shocking, indeed, and it also lists Marvel Studios on El Muerto, Venom 3, and Sony's June and Oct 2023 projects, but not Feige. I'm getting around to updating the other articles with that info and more. Plus, there's some casting for Florence Kasumba in BP2 and Walton Goggins in Armor Wars, and confirming the Nova series is the space project. I've got screenshots I may put in a Dropbox just so others can verify it for themselves, but this is such a payoff. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:02, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here's the Dropbox folder of some of the listings I downloaded, plus relevant screenshots of the Marvel stuff. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I always knew it would be if any regular MCU editor took the plunge! Thanks again for doing that. A free image site such as IMGUR might be beneficial too to widely share, if you'd want to keep the Dropbox folder "in house" per se between WP:MCU editors. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also wonder about the full PDFs, if there's a way to host those on a more easily viewable site or if doing that would get into legal/copyright issues. But seeing as you are a subscribing member, it could be ok? Maybe look to see if there are any sort of terms and service associated with subscribing and we could brainstorm that! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Man, I perused the screenshots in the folder, you were right, what a treasure trove! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have added all of the info to the relevant Sony articles now. There is some local Iceland newspaper from February that reported on a Marvel Spidey "offshoot" filming there, as per this report, and The Cosmic Circus picked up on it here and here to be Kraven via TrueNorth. TrueNorth and Iceland were listed for Kraven in a PW listing, so I'm now working on gathering all of that info. PW does have terms & conditions for members here that I'm still in the process of reading through, and just to note, they are DMCA protected. I must admit, this is kind of out of my league in this area, but hopefully, we'll be able to showcase the listings somehow, as to prevent others from questioning it when additional sources are not available. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for all the work! I'll see if I can get any sort of clarity about repurposing at least maybe the screenshots you have of each production and if that would be ok. One thing on your work, with Madame Web, seeing as only Feige is listed in that as a producer, I'm wondering if we can make the jump that that means Marvel Studios would be a production company. Feige himself could just be a producer (or executive producer ultimately) and Marvel Studios could have no involvement. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks again. I appreciate you taking the time to help me out with this. For Feige and Madam Web, Marvel Studios is also listed as a producing studio on that film, Marvel Studios is producing El Muerto, Venom 3, and Silk, and Marvel Studios and Feige are producing the June and October 2023 films. Granted, some of those producers could just end up being EPs, but yeah, Marvel Studios and Feige are producing MW. It's interesting that these all have Marvel Studios involved in some capacity while Kraven only has Marvel Entertainment listed (in the same listings for the others). Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh I see the Marvel Studios part of it now. I didn't see that originally, only Feige, hence the question. Yeah, no problem. I'll do my best to see what I can find out. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]