Talk:List of Arrowverse cast members/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Status of Wentworth Miller in 2016-17 season

Wentworth Miller is no longer a series regular on Legends of Tomorrow but has "entered a series regular contract with Legends producing studio Warner Bros. TV, with his duties spread over the different Greg Berlanti DC shows, for the time being Legends and Flash. [...] Berlanti and his team pitched Miller a new arrangement where he would have flexibility and recur on multiple shows simultaneously as Snart. “What it really emulates to us is the comic books themselves where there really are a cast of characters,” Berlanti said. While Miller, who also has been filming the Prison Break followup, “won’t be part of the team of Legends on board of The Waverider next year, he will have a very active role on the show.” Miller’s is “the first contract not applicable to just one show,” Berlanti said. “In success we hope to continue with other characters finding their way across all the shows.”". What should we do about this? Should he be labelled ^M on The Flash season 3 and Legends of Tomorrow season 2? Should we use a new label, for example ^U denoting "Universe Regulars"? Or should we leave it unlabelled? Perhaps a note? I feel like this is such a unique situation that it should be acknowledged in some form or another, but because of it's unikeness I do not believe there's already a system in play for it.Oraklebat (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Leave unlabeled until the exact info on his appearances is known, and how he gets credited in the openings. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree that we should wait until we know more about the situation. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:29, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

John Barrowman has signed a similar contract to Miller's one, now being a regular on all of the shows. Should we label Miller as series regular in all shows, given that the original article established that he would be a series regular in all of them?Oraklebat (talk) 21:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I think we should wait until episodes begin airing. While we know this information, we don't know if that means they get starring credit in all episodes, even if they don't appear, or only once they appear. If the latter, then it is better for us to wait until those episode air. If the former, we can easily add the tags after the first episodes of the three series air in early October 2016. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:09, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Additionally, the source only says it allows him to appear on the other two series, not that he actually will. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

If he's not really confirmed to be in The Flash or DC's Legends of Tomorrow, shouldn't he be in the Arrow Season 5 box rather than The Flash Season 3 box?Do not revert (talk) 21:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

That is correct. It was a math error on my part clean up the content. It has been fixed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Supergirl crossover mention

Are the Supergirl characters/cast going to be included on the list for the 4 day crossover event? Also if that universe ultimately combines with that of the Arrowverse, will the cast members like Melissa Benoist, etc. be on this list? Jester66 (talk) 04:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

We will get to these sorts of things when we need to (i.e. when crossovers actually start happening). But if the series does somehow move to the Arrowverse with this season, then I think it makes sense to add the season's cast to the table, following the criteria we have already established. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:17, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Universe Regular Status

So can we talk about how we are handling this, because right now it seems like we are just putting them down on all series without knowing the ins and out of which series they will be on, or how they will be treated within the show. Like how do we know that Cassidy won't appear on Flash Season 3 due to Flashpoint or Legends season 2 due to time travel? We don't know that it will be Arrow season 5 that she appears on? The source we have just says that she died in Arrow season 4 and then details the season 5 villain and doesn't say she will definitely appear on Arrow season 5 as a regular.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 16:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Well we at least know Cassidy will be in the Season 5 premiere to give her dying wish to Oliver. - NoahTheKingOfWikipedia (talk) 18:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Even so, we still don't know if she'll be credited as a series regular on the show itself, so in the table I don't think she should be listed as a series regular for Arrow Season 5.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 18:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

We also dont know that Katie is playing Laurel on these shows, she could be playing an alternate version or a different character.. All of these guys shouldnt be listed unless we know for sure they are on those shows.. and putting the main cast label on them isnt right either as we dont know that they will be considered that on each show... Lets wait on this till we get more info on how its gonna be handled. Spanneraol (talk) 20:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I was going to say that it should be updated once appearances are actually made on the subsequent series. Yes we know from the SDCC panel that Laurel will be in the Arrow S5 premiere, but we don't know the crediting. Once we see how the series are crediting Miller, Barrowman and Cassidy, we should then have a further discussion on the matter, especially if they use something like "Special Appearance by". Because with that, we know the real world aspects of the deal, that they are "series regulars", but the crediting would not reflect that. So at this time, WP:NORUSH, and we can handle it better come October. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:12, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

What we could do is get rid of the M's next to their name in these seasons and replace them with a U for all shows that they are currently confirmed to appear in, or maybe just let the little note a be good enough for now.NTC TNT (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Supergirl

I'm not sure how reliable this website is but this states that one of the EPs of Arrow confirmed that Supergirl will be on episodes of The Flash, Arrow and Legends of Tomorrow.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/supergirl-common-thread-flash-arrow-legends-tomorrow-crossover

Jester66 (talk) 18:00, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

CBR is very reliable (as an FYI for your future editing). The info is already added to the article (under the section "Introduced in The Flash (season 3)"). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:08, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Favre1fan93, I was also wondering about her uncredited archive appearance in Season 2 of The Flash, whether or not that should be included as well? Jester66 (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

This table should really only include actual new performances, but the archive appearance is mentioned in other places, such as the main Arrowverse article. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I was going to put it on the other thread actually. Jester66 (talk) 04:28, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Berlanti comments on Supergirl in relation to Arrowverse

What do you make of these comments made by Greg Berlanti: “It was fun being on CBS, but CW, we obviously make a lot of these shows with CW. We obviously have a shorthand,” Berlanti said of the future of “Supergirl,” adding, Story-wise, it’s fun to think of the shows actually truly all in one universe.” https://variety.com/2016/tv/news/variety-night-in-the-writers-room-drama-panel-greg-berlanti-supergirl-1201795796/ Jester66 (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Lexa Doig Cast as Talia al Ghul

Arrow Casts Talia al Ghul With Continuum/Andromeda's Lexa Doig

References

 Done Added. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:23, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

New format proposal

The table as it is now is pretty unwieldy, and for my screen I have to scroll both vertically and horizontally to view it, which is not ideal. Also, we have just got renewals for the three main shows, which is going to add more columns to the table. I think it is clear that we need to come up with a new format, and I propose changing the article to the format I have mocked up here, which has a separate table for each show, with easy links between the tables for characters who have crossed over series. I'm pretty sure I've got everything right, so if others want to go for this then we could implement it straight away. So, what do you guys think? - adamstom97 (talk) 02:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Somehow it will have to accommodate the animated Constantine, which is part of the Arrowverse. If Berlanti and co. suddenly announce one day that the "Arrowverse" now means a multiverse (which will therefore include Supergirl), have you planned what to do for that? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah looks okay for me. Only question the further series column if that should somehow have individual subcolumns for each and like a {{yes}} template used. But that would take up more space. Kailash, the animated Constantine will need to be part of a larger discussion on the relevant articles once more info is revealed. So for now, it is okay. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I was just trying to come up with a way to keep the interconnections as easy as possible for readers. Here's a new version that has anchors so the "Further series" links go to the actual "Introduced in other series" sections. So if someone is reading about Diggle and sees that he has also been in Flash, they can click on that link and go straight to the exact table section where Diggle's Flash appearances are listed. I'm not sure if that is any better. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:42, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Do we need to keep the "introduced in season 3" type stuff? That should be fairly clear from the table when the character was introduced so i dont think those extra headers are really necessary anymore. Spanneraol (talk) 13:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I think they are if a reader does not immediately realize the rows are organized, alphabetically, by season. While seeing a large amount of grey for season one after a while might be a good indication, I don't think the headers are hurting. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I think they also help cut down on the number of characters being lumped together in big sections, which helps with readability. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I like it. This fixes a problem I've had with this table for a long while. One thing though is, it wasn't initially clear to me what the "Further series" column was - perhaps if full names of shows could be listed instead of just "F" or "L" - I understand that takes up a lot of space, but something like that might be clearer and easier to understand. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 23:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

The point is that they are links, so clicking on them explains what they are, but a note could be added to the key to explain those if needed. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:12, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah notes in the key would definitely help with that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

That sounds good. Just the link isn't enough if it's not clear what it is. Just keeping WP:LINKSTYLE in mind: "The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links" --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 16:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay guys, I'm going to be bold and make the change over. Let me know what you think about the solution I came up with for the further series links. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I think it looks good, but I still think the "further series" column should be clearer (as per the reasonings in WP:LINKSTYLE). I thought explaining it in the key was a good idea. Another thing is that under the "Introduced in other series" headers, it doesn't actually specify what series they were introduced in, and it doesn't direct you to a place where you could find this information. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 04:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you can propose some wording for that explanation? And the page already shows where characters were introduced, I think explaining it twice would be a bit much. This page is just supposed to be an overview of all the series and how actors cross over between them: we say when they are introduced, and note any crossovers. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps something like "Letters in the Further series column indicate other Arroverse series each character appeared in (A indicates the character appeared in Arrow, F indicates The Flash, V indicates Vixen, L indicates Legends of Tomorrow, and S indicates Supergirl)"?

Also, the page might have the information for where they were introduced, but each table does not. If you came here and went straight to the Flash table, and looked at the character Flash, you'd see he first appeared in another series - but you wouldn't know which one. So you wouldn't know where to go to get that information. I think it's just simpler to use the column that's there, and provide links to his other series appearances in each table. Although these tables are presented together, they are still separate tables and need to make sense on their own, as well as part of the greater list. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I'll try that wording out.

I still think that is a bit over the top. Comparatively, List of Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors doesn't go over what film each character was introduced in when they appear in later tables, nor does List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors say what films characters come from when they crossover to Marvel TV. It's just too much. And it isn't like the characters' other appearances are difficult to find—you will come across them if you read the whole article, or you can use the Find shortcut to look for their name. Using the Further series column would also make everything more confusing, I feel, especially when people start clicking on links that take them in circles around the article looking for the first appearance of a character. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

You're right that those lists don't provide specific information about where the character first appeared, but they do direct you to it. List of Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors says which Phase the character first appeared in so you can go to that phase table, and List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors says which other media the character first appeared in so you can go to the film actors page for film and one-shot actors page for one-shots. It's less about needing to have that information, but more about needing to direct people to the table that can give them that information. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Exactly, at the MCU film page a reader can see what Phase the character is from, and go look through that table. At the MCU TV page a reader can see what other page the character is from, and go look through the table(s) there. Here a reader can see that a character was introduced at one of the other tables in the page and can look through those. The latter is between the two MCU articles, in terms of usefulness, so I still don't see why it is so necessary to do this. Even if we sent readers to the exact table, they would still have to search through the different seasons. And if we link to the exact season, they would still have some looking to do. What about linking to a precise row in another table? It's just ridiculous. All readers need to know is that a certain character was introduced on a different series, and then they can use some basic knowledge to find the other times that character is listed in the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:08, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, but it's just a couple of letters on the side. I don't think it's cluttered or tiresome. And I think it's necessary to tell people which table to be looking in. Just as List of Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors directs you to the table where you can find the introduction of a character. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 05:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

It's more that it's confusing. Those links go to further appearances a character has made. If we just link to every appearance every time, then we will be creating loops of links sending readers around the page, potentially in circles, looking for a specific listing. It's not like hitting ctrl+F is all that difficult. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Love the new format. Thanks for finally doing something right. Becca the naughty girl (talk) 13:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

If we're assuming the reader can just ctrl+F when the table doesn't tell them where to go, then surely we can assume the reader would understand where they've come from after clicking a link, and therefore where the other links go. So they won't go in circles. It's not confusing, in fact it's probably less confusing. You wouldn't have to search for a character's appearance in one table out of four (which will grow) just to find the different series they appeared in. Especially when it's so arbitrary - Vandal Savage's other series information is listed under The Flash, even though he was the main villain through Season 1 of Legends. It'd be good to get some fresh opinions also. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Great job @adamstom97 on the new format. Looks much better! Brojam (talk) 05:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)