Jump to content

Talk:DC Extended Universe: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m →‎Worlds of DC: move signature back where it belongs
Line 74: Line 74:
:If we make up a title instead of using a sourced title then it does become relevant how it sounds to editors. Capitalization is used for proper names so "DC Cinematic Universe" sounds like a proper name and not a description like "DC shared film universe" or whatever. "some sources claim there is an official name" was a reference to "Worlds of DC" (which I don't personally think is an official name). [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 11:21, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
:If we make up a title instead of using a sourced title then it does become relevant how it sounds to editors. Capitalization is used for proper names so "DC Cinematic Universe" sounds like a proper name and not a description like "DC shared film universe" or whatever. "some sources claim there is an official name" was a reference to "Worlds of DC" (which I don't personally think is an official name). [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 11:21, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/103.255.6.69|103.255.6.69]] ([[User talk:103.255.6.69|talk]]) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Why not both it's should be (Worlds of DC,also known as DCEU)[[Special:Contributions/103.255.6.69|103.255.6.69]] ([[User talk:103.255.6.69|talk]]) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/103.255.6.69|103.255.6.69]] ([[User talk:103.255.6.69|talk]]) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Why not both it's should be (Worlds of DC,also known as DCEU)[[Special:Contributions/103.255.6.69|103.255.6.69]] ([[User talk:103.255.6.69|talk]]) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
::The section below voted on whether or not we move to Worlds of DC. There were four supporters and eighteen who oppose. We've already reached a consensus. DC Extended Universe stays as it is. [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]] ([[User talk:SeanWheeler|talk]]) 04:35, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


== Requested move 22 July 2018 ==
== Requested move 22 July 2018 ==

Revision as of 04:35, 2 August 2018

Blackhawk (again)

Alright, even though I'm not the one adding controversial content, I'll start the discussion for it. Blackhawk's only source for being in the DCEU is this Syfy article. This article sources other articles from the (substantially more reliable) Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and Deadline, all of which only mention that it is a DC film, and makes no mention of any Justice League characters or any other connection to the wider universe. I don't see how this keeps getting added, but I'd like a discussion to happen so we can stop the constant back and forth of addition and removal. This is obviously just my opinion, so I'd like to hear the thoughts of others. Sock (tock talk) 22:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DisneyMetalhead and TheJoebro64: Pinging users. Sock (tock talk) 22:52, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That Syfy article is clearly making a presumption. Until we get a reliable source directly confirming its connection to the DCEU, it should not be present in this article. Simply presuming that it will be set within the DCEU is not acceptable. Prefall 23:03, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to start a conversation about this. To be honest, I don't think either Blackhawk or the Joker movie should be listed until we get concrete evidence they will be a part of the DCEU. With Blackhawk, just because WB hasn't said it won't be a DCEU project doesn't mean it will be (that's like saying Mario and Star Wars are in the same universe because Disney and Nintendo haven't said they aren't). The Joker stuff strikes me as just speculation. JOEBRO64 23:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I highly disagree. Given the fact that the articles cited are assuming that there is another DC Films franchise; and given that Forbes broke the news that the Joker origin movie is actually linked to The Batman - there are not two franchises. Forbes is a reliable source and stated that news came from those involved. The articles only state that "perhaps" or "maybe" it won't be a part of the DCEU. At this point in time - there is only one franchise. It doesn't state declaratively that the film is not DCEU. Because of all of these reasons, the page should acknowledge the film. Not to mention that a member of the Blackhawk squadron has already appeared in the DCEU (i.e.: Wonder Woman).--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 23:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Joker stuff is absolutely speculation, based on the quote in its cited Screenrant article. The writer stating it even stresses that it is "just a rumor". It should not be listed here either. Prefall 23:19, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since we know DC is planning multiple universe, with the DCEU that we already have plus some standalone ones like the Joker origin movie, there needs to be very explicit confirmation that a film will be in the DCEU to be listed here. At the moment, the sources provided only tell us that a Blackhawk movie is being made and nothing more, so that information should not be listed here. Just keep it at Blackhawk (DC Comics) for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:34, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's over-examination when we start deciding that a film studio, who with heroes based off of their comics only has one cinematic franchise. The articles stating that the Joker origin would only be in a separate franchise has not been confirmed by the studio. Furthermore, Forbes stated that someone involved with the studio/movie has made it known to them that the film will be tied to The Batman film. Matt Reeves' Batman is in the unofficially named "DCEU". I don't see how the connection and obvious placement doesn't make sense to anyone. Additionally any reports stating that Blackhawk COULD be in the 'second franchise' are speculation. There is no second film franchise. Blackhawk is DCEU, I cited my sources multiple times and each one are reliable sources.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 13:58, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sidenote User:190.78.59.28, User:186.167.248.64, User:186.167.251.8 and User:2804:431:d72d:27be:a162:5393:6905:dfd7 all revert edits including ones specific to this conversation without giving reason as to why they think the sources are incorrect. Because of this, there as been no real debate, nor can any of my reverts with reason/cause be construed as edit warring. Now that someone has made a comment on my talk page, and there's actual reasoning to discuss - I am engaged in the discussion here. Also one of them stated in their edit comment that I have "no respect for consensus". As is indicated by this conversation, there is no consensus at this time.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 14:13, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DisneyMetalhead, you are outright making information up at this point. None of those sources speculate that Blackhawk could be in a second franchise, and the only source you cited (which I challenged) references other articles that also do not say it is in the DCEU. The Syfy article is speculation and sources articles that do not back up the information it provides. I have not been following the spinoff Joker film so I don't have an opinion about that, but claiming that the article from Syfy which sources three other, more notable references and adds information from thin air is somehow more reliable than the article's own sources is like referencing a Wikipedia page and saying it's better than pulling an article from the reference list. You cited one source and there's significant doubt as to the reliability of its claim, as evidenced by several other users. And "Not to mention that a member of the Blackhawk squadron has already appeared in the DCEU" is WP:OR at worst and WP:SYNTHESIS at best. The absence of denial is not confirmation, and it never will be.
Sidenote, consensus or not your edits were reverted on several occasions. You sourced WP:BOLD in your restoration and yet you ignored the core principle of its companion when reverted, which is to discuss. Somehow I ended up having to start this discussion when I honestly had no interest, because this page has gotten incredibly unstable over something that should have been brought here months ago. Sock (tock talk) 14:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again @Sock:, I disagree completely. Forbes stated outright that the Joker origin film is connected to The Batman. That's as plain as it gets. As for the Syfy reference - I can see your angle. And yet, was definitely not in violation of WP:OR nor WP:SYNTHESIS - as it was confirmed before Wonder Woman came out that Said Taghmaoui's character was a member of the Blackhawk Sqaudron, which can for example be read here. I referenced official franchise in my previous statement. Also, this didn't have to come up months ago as you stated - since only recently did Forbes state that the Joker origin is DCEU. Also, I have read plenty of articles speculating that Blackhawk may be in the now non-existent second franchise. That is what I was referencing, not your references.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 04:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes writer does not paint the statements he has heard about the Joker film as concrete. Read: "[Article]: Hughes stresses that this is just a rumor for now, but that he's been told by two different people associated with Warner Bros. that there have been discussions about making The Batman exist in the same world as the Joaquin Phoenix led Joker." — "[Hughes]: I haven't heard anything firm [...]" At most, it sounds like they're considering its inclusion. This is speculation.
Taghmaoui's character in Wonder Woman is still a leap, as he nor his character are acknowledged in the press releases. Sources simply do not support Blackhawk being part of the DCEU at this time. Prefall 08:14, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Television series based on DC Extended Universe

DC Extended Universe need television series based on the films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.255.217.165 (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which series? Do you have reliable sources that connect them to the WoDC? -- AlexTW 22:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero television series that are a part of the Worlds of DC film franchise.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Worlds of DC

Why was the page move reverted? Yes, you could say it's "more commonly known as the DC Extended Universe", but that's because that is it's old name and "Worlds of DC" wasn't a name before today. Therefore, it is now a deprecated title, the article should remain moved to reflect its new title, and the lead should read "The Worlds of DC (WDC), previously known as the DC Extended Universe (DCEU)". -- AlexTW 22:05, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TOTALLY Agree on this one. The studio had never once referred to the film franchise as "DC Extended Universe" anyhow. The page should be moved and have a redirect link to it for searches of 'DC Extended Universe'. It is should also read that it was "previously known by the unofficial title of DC Extended Universe'.... from here on out it's called the Worlds of DC.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At this point it’s still the WP:COMMONNAME. We have no idea how things might turn out. The WP:OFFICIALNAME, which guidelines suggest not to use unless it’s also the common name, may never catch on with the general public. Per WP:NAMECHANGES: we should wait to see how reliable sources handle it moving forward. We are in WP:NORUSH.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:36, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An yet, there is also the guideline to never use unofficial titles for pages... the studio's officially named the franchise. That is how the page should reflect this. Your concern with 'common name' is unfounded as it has always been negated and waved away by the studios involved. A redirect link can easily be added to this page for those individuals that attempt searching it by 'DC Extended Universe'.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What guideline might that be? WP:COMMONNAME is quite clear, it’s the name most commonly used by reliable sources. “Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources).” If reliable sources from here on commonly use “The Worlds of DC” then we will change the name at that point. For now we will wait and see.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't rename this article The Worlds of DC?OscarFercho (talk) 01:57, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Per above but you are more than welcome to request a move.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COMMONNAME says to use the common name to be recognizable. It's possible The Worlds of DC will soon become the common name but we don't know. Some official names never catch on. And personally I would like to see exactly what has been said officially before even judging whether it's the official name and not just a term used in one promotional event. I haven't seen the name on an official website. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah there's no actual statement, just speculation based on a banner. See: https://www.cbr.com/warner-bros-dc-extended-universe-worlds-of-dc-reveal/

The announcement came during Warner Bros.’ Hall H panel at Comic-Con International in San Diego, when the DC Films segment was introduced with a banner reading, “Welcome to the Worlds of DC.” This move signifies the unofficial name, the DC Extended Universe, can finally be retired.

It should, of course, be noted that Warner Bros. has not officially announced that the shared film universe is now Worlds of DC, but several attendees displayed the new banner on Twitter during the panel.

Uthanc (talk) 03:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How is that supposed to be the name? People are reading in too much. This is like saying "Welcome to my restaurant". This does not mean the restaurant name is "my restaurant". -115.66.196.146 (talk) 05:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The DCEU had been referred by many names before. It's been officially called "DC Universe" before. For all we know, Worlds of DC could just be the name of the Comic-Con exhibit. We have to wait for that term to be commonly used before we move it. And right now, it's still best known as the DC Extended Universe. Captain Marvel has been officially Shazam since 2011, but we still name his page Captain Marvel (DC Comics). SeanWheeler (talk) 05:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
According to batman-news, there isnt any press release from WB, nor is the name being used at all officially (yet). All other clickbait sites that reported this "news" link to the original article by screenrant. this might just be a case of people misreading the text like i said. "World of X" can be used for many things. "Welcome to the World of DC" is literally just a welcome message!!!. I do not think we should even add this "World of DC" until it is used officially. DCEU had never been used by WB since that is unofficial. But IF this "World of DC" is really official, there is no reason for WB not to use it. So i rather we wait. -115.66.196.146 (talk) 05:51, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has never been officially named the DCEU and we have not gotten a confirmation by DC about the 'Worlds of DC' title so I believe until a confirmation is made by a DC official, we should name it "Untitled DC Cinematic Universe." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic Moore (talk • contribs) 06:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mystic Moore: This! The article title like that will clarify that, 1) there is a DC cinematic universe going on, and 2) it is not officially named yet. JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 16:11, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mystic Moore: Anyway, why don't you suggest Untitled DC Cinematic Universe or other neutral titles at #Requested move 22 July 2018? JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 16:04, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DC Extended Universe is still the WP:COMMONNAME for the universe, official or not. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And "Untitled DC Cinematic Universe" sounds rather bad to me. It claims it's untitled when there is a common name and some sources claim there is an official name. And the capitalization of "Cinematic Universe" implies it is a real name. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, it's not actually about how it sounds to you and secondly the DCEU is an unofficial name and anybody who says it is apart from officials is lying. DC Extended Universe is commonly used when talking about it, but it isn't official, which is why, Untitled DC Cinematic Universe, while not catchy, implies, that hey, this doesn't have an official title, but this is a universe of films made by DC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic Moore (talk • contribs)

If we make up a title instead of using a sourced title then it does become relevant how it sounds to editors. Capitalization is used for proper names so "DC Cinematic Universe" sounds like a proper name and not a description like "DC shared film universe" or whatever. "some sources claim there is an official name" was a reference to "Worlds of DC" (which I don't personally think is an official name). PrimeHunter (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

103.255.6.69 (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Why not both it's should be (Worlds of DC,also known as DCEU)103.255.6.69 (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The section below voted on whether or not we move to Worlds of DC. There were four supporters and eighteen who oppose. We've already reached a consensus. DC Extended Universe stays as it is. SeanWheeler (talk) 04:35, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 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! 23:14, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DC Extended Universe → Worlds of DC – Recent rename of the franchise, per sources in the article and initial usage in lead and infobox, and per suggested RM above. -- AlexTW 12:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as nominator (question was neutral, supporting position listed here); if a movie is renamed, do we keep the old title because that's what the public called it? No, we change it. Wonder Woman 1984 was and is commonly known as Wonder Woman 2, but was moved as soon as the title changed. Why? It was the official name. DCEU was never its common name; per the source, "The DC Extended Universe, or DCEU for short, was the unofficial name", and "The DC Extended Universe has been officially named the "Worlds of DC" as revealed during this year's SDCC Warner Bros. and DC Hall H panel." -- AlexTW 12:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An unofficial name can still be the most common name. As far as I know no name was as common as DCEU prior to this recent announcement. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:51, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose All we got as proof is a banner saying "Welcome to the Worlds of DC," which just be a tagline that could mean "Welcome to the DC Universe." There is no logo for the brand, no TM marker on the banner. Oh, and here's an article debunking the rumor: [1]. Worlds of DC is no more official than DC Extended Universe. SeanWheeler (talk) 13:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if 'Worlds of DC' is the official name (as stated during SDCC) then that is the name the page should be titled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.212.125 (talk)
And your reply to the given example that shows that we do indeed use official titles? -- AlexTW 15:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What Wonder Woman 1984? I can’t say that I’m overly familiar with the circumstances surrounding that topic. But WP:OTHERSTUFF always exists and Wikipedia routinely fails to live up to its own standards. That said, the use of official names is not forbidden but it also needs to be the common name. At this point it’s just to early to tell if that is the case here.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not sure if non users opinion would be considered, but there is only one source, which is screenrant.com. Most other website which published the same article cited Screenrant. Screenrant creates the article based on the banner shown during SDCC. It could literally just be a welcome message. Furthermore, there is no official trademark filed by Warner Brothers. According to Batman-news.com, the terms had not been used anywhere else, including press release made by Warner Brothers. This is very likely a case of misreporting where people read too much into the words. -115.66.196.146 (talk) 16:09, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as far as I'm seeing, Worlds at DC might not even be the name of the universe. It could have simply been the name of the panel/SDCC exhibit. Additionally, if it is the name, I'm also seeing it being considered as a larger umbrella name for all DC films (DCEU ones, plus ones like the upcoming Joker), so even still, it wouldn't apply to the films and scope as listed in this article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's too early for me.--Dipralb (talk) 18:27, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - It is not clear that this is actually the name of the universe, that is just an assumption that is being made. And even if it was, it is too early to see if it will become the common name. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:03, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - No official announcement on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.167.249 (talk) 23:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Since the studio hasn't commented or stated specifically if the implied/suggested change is their official name or not (I tend to lean towards that it is), I'm going to hold off making an official stance. As for all the "common name" B.S., as far as I've seen almost every article since SDCC has been calling it "Worlds of DC" since the announcement. A lot of editors just like to get petty and strangle the heck out of other editors suggestions. Up until a couple of months ago - rarely any editors had input on this page. Funny how times change. Should the studio state that "Worlds of DC" is the franchise's official name, then I completely one thousand percent Support this suggestion. Until then however, maybe we hold off. There are plenty of rules by the way against using fan-made/unofficial titles for pages. @AlexTheWhovian: has a point, regarding how film titles change and are adjusted. Seeing as this page is a film series, it makes sense to follow suit. Regardless - the fact that this page chose to be named by an unofficial/studio disputed/non-sanctioned name is rather ridiculous to begin with.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 06:11, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COMMONNAME is policy. If you have a problem with it then I suggest you take it up there. "There are plenty of rules by the way against using fan-made/unofficial titles for pages" which one would that be? There is no such statement at WP:AT.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:36, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TriiipleThreat: there are various examples of "do not invent names" all over WP guidelines. If you have not noticed these nor understood them to mean just that, then perhaps you need to re-read them.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DisneyMetalhead: And which name did we invent?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TriiipleThreat: you didn't invent a name. But you're using a journalist's invented name. It's not official at all, and never was. That's my point. Just because it has commonly been used, doesn't make it at all accurate.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 21:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DisneyMetalhead: That's what I thought you'd say. You are misinterpreting the policy. It is telling editors "do not invent names," not "do not use invented names." The policy goes out of its way to caution the use of official names, and says nothing of unofficial names. Remember, WP:OR only applies to Wikipedia editors, not reliable sources.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TriiipleThreat:, I couldn't disagree more. Encyclopedias shouldn't use unofficial names for anything. There is no good example of a page that uses an unofficial name for it's title. I understand the guidelines. Just because it's become common due to the lack of a name, doesn't make it the right name for the page.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 21:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then again your issue is with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia itself, in which case you should take it up on the policy page.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think North Korea is a much better article title than the official "Democratic People's Republic of Korea". We write articles to help our readers, not the article subjects. It helps readers to use terms they know. There are also many cases where even the subject prefers an unofficial name, e.g. Bill Clinton and not "William Jefferson Clinton". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: - those are both poor examples, as each are official/shortened versions of the name. Neither are unofficial titles. @TriiipleThreat: - again there are no guidelines that encourage unofficial names being used. Especially for a franchise that doesn't even have a name yet. My point is that when the studio releases an official title, that is the one that everyone will use. Just because DCEU is a commonly used abbreviation (due to journalists) doesn't make it a 'WP:COMMONNAME'. I will go to the policy page.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your refusal to get the point is astounding. The guidelines encourage the use of the most commonly used title, regardless if its official or not. My point is that when the studio releases an official title, that is the one that everyone will use. You're probably right but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We'll just have to wait and see, but there are no guarantees and we're not subject to the whims of a film studio. Just because DCEU is a commonly used abbreviation (due to journalists) doesn't make it a 'WP:COMMONNAME'. LOLWUT, "just because DCEU is a commonly used name doesn't make it a common name." I'm done.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, "North Korea" is not only unofficial but strongly opposed by the government which claims all of Korea. Their own shortened form is just "Korea". PrimeHunter (talk) 20:10, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
List of references using "Worlds of DC"

Nergaal (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are all making an assumption based on the same information that we are looking at, and there are more sources still who have pointed out the fact that no actual announcement has been made. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:08, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamstom.97:, and yet those articles are doing exactly what you requested in your first argument. Articles since SDCC have been calling it the "Worlds of DC" universe. Whether is correct or not from the studio's standpoint, @Nergaal:'s references are valid. Someone just needs to pose a question to someone involved. Only a matter of time before there's direct comment from the studio.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DisneyMetalhead: They may be valid, but that doesn't mean we should jump to adjusting our article here, especially since we have a number, probably stronger, sources stating it is most definitely not a name change or update to the universe. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Favre1fan93:, they're exactly what you stated you were looking for. On top of that, what sources are you referring to stating that it is not the name? I'm not necessarily saying that it is. The only source I have seen that states it is not, is a Batman news site, which is a fan-page.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 21:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: There was no "rename" as DCEU was not its official name at the first place. It was actually coined by journalist Keith Staskiewicz of EW. Fans and media are jumping into conclusion after seeing a banner at SDCC. As of now, the studio has not announced it as their franchise name. It's too early to have a discussion about this.--Let There Be Sunshine 17:15, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Let There Be Sunshine:, thank you for your input. This is exactly what I'm referring to in my comments. The studio has never named this franchise. They have never once called it the DCEU, it as a journalist. And yet there's a debate about keeping it as the page title for WP:commontitle purposes. Once the studio states what the franchise is named, it has to stay as-is. Regardless when it is given a name, the page needs to reflect it, because as of right now it's so inaccurate (i.e.: There is no franchise titled DCEU).--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 21:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The point as made by others is that the banner is just literally a welcome message, and is not supposed to be taken as an official announcement. While many websites report on this, the only source of information is still this banner. others already pointed out that there is no trademark made, no mention of the name on press releases etc which is why this should not be taken as official. -115.66.196.146 (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Limiting recurring cast members

I made a bold edit here and removed all actors from the recurring section that had not been billed for their roles. This removal included Carrie Farris, Steppenwolf, Silas Stone, and Zeus. In my opinion, these characters are minor and should not be included in the table as none of their roles were ever billed in anything but the credits. I also removed Shazam! from the listing, as no cast members are recurring yet and argue that the film's presence is simply eating space in the template.

I was (understandably) reverted by DisneyMetalhead, and I knew I ran the risk of following WP:BRD, so here we are. I propose that the cast listed be required to have been billed in the billing block for at least one film, and that films without cast members appearing in multiple films be excluded until the time that they do appear in multiple films. Sock (tock talk) 15:59, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the criteria should be tightened. Being billed for at least one film should be a must, and I would suggest appearing in multiple franchises rather than just multiple films would also be a good criterion. And I also agree that films should only be included in the table if they have a cast member that meets the other criteria, as this is not supposed to be a full cast list. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:11, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree - the films aren't overtly stacked with recurring characters to where a change needs to be made. Characters listed within the chart are exactly as the table is named "Recurring characters". Each of them have significance thus far within the film series. Should the occurrence happen more frequetly to where it's getting bloated, then absolutely restrictions will need to be made (just as was delayed far too long on the X-Men film universes page). At this time, the table is concise and includes recurring important characters. @Sock: you also deleted Zod in your edits.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for that exclusion, it genuinely slipped my mind. That said, I stand by that deletion. Shannon only portrays the character in MoS. We don't credit Robert Downey, Jr. for portraying Sid Shattuck in The Nice Guys because he never spent a day on set. All things considered, Shannon didn't for BvS either. But I can easily repent on that one. Sock (tock talk) 19:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even if Shannon wasn't present he has interviews talking about the cgi scanning that he had to do for his role in the film... which lead to people thinking he'd play Doomsday. The actor is present through use of CGI. The table is fine how it is. The chart/film series/franchise isn't bloated at all yet. Should it come to a point where it is actually messy (again see X-Men film universe for that); then a change is constructive and needful.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DC_Extended_Universe&oldid=853058139"