Talk:Otto Octavius (film character)

Requested move 22 December 2021

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The result of the move request was: Withdrawn, as the article has been redirected as well as per the IP's reasoning. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:40, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

---

Otto Octavius (film character) → Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series) – This article was cut-paste moved from Draft:Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series) (with a histmerge already requested), but this current title is not WP:CONSISTENT with the other character articles in Category:Spider-Man (2002 film series). Note that it doesn't matter that Octavius also appears in an MCU film, as he did not originate from that franchise. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• Support per InfiniteNexus, agreeing that this page should reflect the film series the character originated in, should we keep the page.--WuTang94 (talk) 23:08, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose: The difference between this and Norman Osborn (Sam Raimi film series) or Peter Parker (Sam Raimi film series) is that Willem Dafoe and Tobey Mcguire appeared as in every film of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy, a character equal to each. Furthermore, unlike Norman (and Harry) Osborn, where an entirely different version was portrayed by Chris Cooper (and Dane DeHaan) in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Molina's Doc Ock is the only Otto Octavius in film: no such distinction is necessary. Alfred Molina has played Doc Ock in precisely two films: Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man: No Way Home. He has appeared in one Sam Raimi film and one MCU film. It would be a similar situation if a page was made for Jamie Foxx's Max Dillon / Electro, given he has similarly only appeared in The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and No Way Home, with an Electro spin-off recently reported to be in development, the same being true of Thomas Haden Church's Flint Marko / Sandman, but if Rhys Ifans' Curt Connors / Lizard received a page, that would be titled Curt Connors (The Amazing Spider-Man film series), given Dylan Baker portrayed a different version of him in Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. The page naming is consistent, there are just not enough of them yet to obviously show it. 89.19.67.31 (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Slight oppose per the IP above. While the proposed name wouldn't be incorrect, the current one is much more concise and completely unambiguous, as unlike Norman Osborn and Peter Parker, there has been only one Otto Octavius portrayed in film thus far. —El Millo (talk) 05:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment Regardless of the result of this Requested move, this article is a complete copy-paste of the existing draft at Draft:Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series), which was already rejected as a duplicate of Doctor Octopus. The creation of this article was a complete bypass of the process. Jalen Folf (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
  • That was reasoning from an older version of the page with much less information, before Spider-Man: No Way Home. Absolutely none of the information presented on this page: the concept and creation, special effects, reception and legacy, or Awards and nominations, are mentioned even once at Doctor Octopus, so that reasoning is now outdated. And there is more sourcing than most Marvel film character articles. 89.19.67.161 (talk) 17:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
    • Henceforth why editors, like yourself, are welcome to add and expand on the draft, so that can be expanded and go through the draft review process to see if it qualifies for the mainspace. We don't simply get to disregard a draft because it was outdated and just make a new mainspace article. That's violating the Articles for Creation policy. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
    • I have gone ahead and implemented the updated contents the IP added in their article to the draft. That can be further expanded upon there. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment I have gone ahead and WP:BOLDly redirected that article back to a redirect, as it already was beforehand. This cut-and-paste move has happened before, and bypasses the articles for creation policy by ignoring the draft, so these two requests for a page move and hist merge shouldn't even be done as it enables what should already be actions that can and should be undone. A discussion on what the target should be should be help at the draft. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:29, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment As has been previously mentioned, this article is mostly a cut and paste of the currently existing draft. However, it does include content the draft doesn't (a picture in the Infobox, an expanded lede, more content in the Return of the Character subsection, etc). The most pertinent course of action (in my humble opinion) would be for the newer additions included on this page to be added to the draft, so it can properly go through the article creation guidelines (although, this time it hopefully won't be instantly dismissed on the grounds of different incarnations not needing different pages). ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 18:49, 23 December 2021 (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.

Splitting discussion for Doctor Octopus

An article that been involved with (Doctor Octopus ) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Otto Octavius (film character)). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Splitting discussion has concluded with consensus to split. Please provide copied from and copied to attributions. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Page name

Shouldn't this page be called Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series) to be consistant with the other Sam Raimi pages like Norman Osborn (Sam Raimi film series), Harry Osborn (Sam Raimi film series), and Peter Parker (Sam Raimi film series)? 2600:1014:B00A:E93D:7D7E:2CAE:24E0:E50C (talk) 16:45, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Please see this discussion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

The other way around might be better. As in the others might need to be renamed for concistency. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 04:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

That was my initial thought as well, but then an IP raised a good point in the aforementioned discussion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

That is a fair point. Although we should be prepared if things change and there is another incarnation of Otto Octavius. Technically there was one or two unnamed male Doctor Octopus cameos in the Spider-Verse movie. But that seems minor. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 06:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I would personally like to see the page renamed to "Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series)" because he is not an MCU character. If the Green Goblin from the original trilogy is called "Norman Osborn (Sam Raimi film series)", why can't the same be said for this? - Cody Fearless-Lee ✉ (talk) / 12:52PM / February 14, 2022

Read the previous discussion linked in the first comment by InfiniteNexus. This disambiguation isn't because the character also appeared in the MCU, it's because it's the only iteration of the character strictly called "Otto Octavius" that has appeared in film. —El Millo (talk) 18:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Page name and main image

I get that Doctor Octopus appeared in an MCU film, but he's not really an MCU character and only appeared via multiverse. This page should be titled "Otto Octavius (Sam Raimi film series)" as it's the franchise he originated from and the main image in this article should be the image from Spider-Man 2. Please consider it. - Cody Fearless-Lee ✉ (talk) / 1:00PM / February 14, 2022

I agree the infobox image should be from Spider-Man 2 as his main and more relevant appearance. —El Millo (talk) 18:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The OP attempted to use a certain image. So I helped this out since he was not that knowledgeable on that. I agree that Spider-Man 2 is a better featured choice. Though the image chosen might not be the best choice since he he is not facing the image. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 07:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Update: Did a different image instead. This time a jpg. Hope that is better. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 08:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

May I ask why we couldn't use the promotional image like the one used for Norman Osborn (Sam Raimi film series)? - Cody Fearless-Lee ✉ (talk) / 12:05AM / February 16, 2022

I just felt like an image of front view was better. I do welcome other thoughts in case anyone feels differently. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 07:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)