Talk:Production of Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame

(Redirected from Talk:Production of Avengers: Infinity War)
Latest comment: 1 year ago by ZooBlazer in topic Working towards a GA nomination
Good articleProduction of Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 14, 2019Articles for deletionKept
March 27, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 15, 2016.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that for the production of Avengers: Infinity War, the films will be the first to be shot entirely using IMAX cameras and its exclusive aspect ratio?
Current status: Good article

inspiration for endgame

edit

Do any sources explicitly state that Endgame draws inspiration or adapts The Infinity Gauntlet? Argento Surfer (talk) 16:12, 22 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Argento Surfer, [1] -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! Argento Surfer (talk) 11:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Howard the Duck

edit

Is it worth mentioning that he was seen in the final battle, despite being appearing in only 18 frames? --Kailash29792 (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Kailash29792, maybe on the article for Howard the Duck but not here. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Not the same gauntlet

edit

According to Markus and McFeely (or one of them), Thanos' gauntlet in Infinity War and Endgame is not the same as the one in Age of Ultron. How to solve this dilemma here? --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:32, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I've added it in. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Working towards a GA nomination

edit

Some Dude From North Carolina please start talk page discussions for articles you have not been a part of before nominating for GA or FA/L to see what the significant contributors think. For this one, Adamstom.97 was doing a rewrite in their sandbox that I was hoping to pick up and finish and implement here. What they were doing I felt was significant changes to help improve the article even more and I personally want to hold off on any nominations for this article until those can be implemented. It's a project I hope to tackle soon. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm late to the party, but is there still anything major that the main editors of the article think that needs added before a nomination? Or would a thorough c/e be the main thing that needs done? -- Zoo (talk) 02:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I had done some work in my sandbox (I think?) quite a while ago to get this article cleaned-up and ready, c/e and making sure that we organised all the information in a logical way was my main goal. I think some of those changes ended up being implemented by someone else, but I will need to check. Once we have that done it will be more clear what we are missing, but off the top of my head I think we are lacking in the post-production / VFX side of things compared to the other stages of production. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:58, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hey @Adamstom.97 so recently, I've been working a bit on the article courtesy of @ZooBlazer reaching out to me and have recently done two edits in the post-production area. I'm obviously quite late to the party as I can see here, but I'll try to be helping out however I can to elevate it to GA. With that being said, I was wondering what else needed to be done. I think my next thing will be fixing up refs and all those minor things. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 22:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I can do c/e run. For me I think it's close for someone to nominate it, looks like Favre1fan93 is the main contributor with the most edits and added text. I feel like Adam's sandbox overhaul could be implemented in the future towards a potential FA nomination. -- ZooBlazertalk 23:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I see. I'll try to look at Adam's sandbox and cross-reference that with the article and see what else could be added. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I take back what I said. Might as well just get everything done first before a GAN and then hopefully it'll be ready for FAC soon after. -- ZooBlazertalk 01:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I feel like since I last made any meaningful contributions to this, other editors and IPs have come in and added a bunch of content/reformatted things, and at least from following those edits, I do feel a c/e is in order. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Just to get an idea @Favre1fan93, how much of the article do you think needs to be reworked prior to at least a GAN? @ZooBlazer has said that there is some stuff in the writing section that needs to be addressed, but I think that the section is fine for now, the best maybe would perhaps be to structure it as per Zoo's sandbox. The VFX section obviously does warrant some work. I was thinking maybe it also be arranged as per Zoo's sandbox but wasn't sure how. I like the idea of doing a section for Thanos and Hulk, and then covering VFX for each of the films in separate subsections but it's just a thought. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think the writing info is fine. The VFX sections are pretty much set up that way from Adam's sandbox already. -- ZooBlazertalk 00:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
My sandbox is just a continuation of what Adam started. It just felt weird editing his sandbox, so I copied it over to one of my sandboxes to continue his work. -- ZooBlazertalk 00:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Dcdiehardfan: From what I just remember without actually diving into diffs, I knew a lot of the more recent edits sometimes did not use list-defined refs, so just ensuring that is the case. And then frankly, it seemed like the content adds were so much, it wasn't worth the time at that point to actually ensure all that was added was accurately reflected from the sources (if I hadn't been previously aware of it myself). That's what I was thinking of at least for work to do, which may have already been done. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Just did a quick check and at the very least it looks like everything is list-defined as of now. -- ZooBlazertalk 02:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Favre1fan93 As @ZooBlazer pointed out, the LDRs are up to date so that's good for now. There are some minor ref issues but I think I can handle that while the other folks can maybe perhaps tackle other issues. I know Zoo is hard at work revamping the VFX section, so I'll leave that to him. Is there anything you had in mind that perhaps you would like to do for the article maybe Favre1fan93? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 18:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm also working on organizing the ref section, so once I finish that and add the info I have for VFX, I'll bring the sandbox changes to the this article and then we probably would need a couple people's eyes for a through c/e. -- ZooBlazertalk 18:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Zoo, how long will it take for you to fully finish up the VFX stuff? I'll be working on this on-and-off and may not be able to fully commit efforts here, but I obviously will try to assist wherever and however much I can. Chances are, once you integrate the VFX stuff, I'll prolly do a quick ref rundown and fix up any observable issues I see there. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Dcdiehardfan I think VFX is actually basically done already. I'm just gonna add a little more for Hulk. Other than that, I'm still working on the ref organization. Once I get that done I know some refs need cleaned up a little, mostly linking the website and being consistent with website/publisher. Most are fine so that part shouldn't take too long. I'm hoping to be done with all of that tomorrow. -- ZooBlazertalk 01:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Wonderful wonderful, I'm glad to hear that it's progressing very well. Btw, don't worry about the ref stuff too much, as I'll also assist you on that one. In fact, I'll do a quick rundown right now just to ease the burdens on that department. Once the info is integrated, I think I'll reconvene here to see if there's a consensus on how to section the stuff. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@ZooBlazer Just to let you know, I did do a big ref check edit just now and have fixed most errors. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
That's what I was talking about on your talk page. The first 175 refs were organized in my sandbox before your edit, so they may still be messed up if they had any issues before. I'll have to fix those before I can copy things over. Shouldn't be too hard though. -- ZooBlazertalk 04:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@ZooBlazer Alright. I apologize if I was a bit hasty with the ref edit. I also went through and did a ref edit on yours and it seems that everything is looking good on your sandbox, the only issue is that /Film is not wikilinked properly. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I moved my sandbox over. It definitely needs a thorough c/e because I was trying to carefully balance mixing Adam's sandbox with mine while mixing in this article. I don't think I unintentionally deleted anything though. -- ZooBlazertalk 07:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is there anymore info that needs focused on or is the biggest thing left copyediting? -- ZooBlazertalk 19:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
And on this tangent, is a thorough ce needed or are there some sections that are solid as of now? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think a thorough one is needed just because of so much info throughout the article. I'll probably read through soon and see what I come across, but it wouldnt hurt to have a couple people do their own ce. -- ZooBlazertalk 19:55, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
So far, the only section that I've found that could maybe use a little more info is the "Screenplays and rewrites" section. It has general info for both movies, then the last paragraph has specific info for IW, but only one sentence for Endgame. -- ZooBlazertalk 01:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
On it, I'll see what I can find, go ahead and proceed with more CE. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I've done a full page ce, which I'm sure I still missed plenty. I also noticed Tilda Swinton was missing from the casting section. Where would her name fit in best in the Endgame part of the section? -- ZooBlazertalk 04:57, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@ZooBlazer Probably either after or before Cumberbatch in this part: Actors who returned for Endgame include: Downey, Hemsworth, Ruffalo, Evans, Johansson, Cumberbatch, Cheadle Dcdiehardfan (talk) 17:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Dcdiehardfan Those are the characters returning from Infinity War. I ended up just adding her before Grillo -- ZooBlazertalk 17:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Oh ok, I see it now. With that being said, I think we got all the bases covered in terms of info and you said you did a full page CE. I'll ask @Favre1fan93 and/or @Adamstom.97 for their thoughts to see if the article is perhaps ready for GAN? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for the delayed response, and thanks for all the work you two have been putting in. I should have some time now to do an extra c/e and see if I think anything else is missing. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:03, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Adamstom.97 Thanks! I can also undo the GAN so that you can nominate if you'd like since you've contributed more than I have to the article. -- ZooBlazertalk 21:21, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
No need, you and Dc have pushed us to get us over the line and I'm fine with you having the notification. Every GAN is always a team effort for these articles. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I agree with @Adamstom.97. This for sure is no small task. Congrats to everyone involved and I hope the GAN gets reviewed soon! Dcdiehardfan (talk) 22:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I have expanded the lead and done a c/e through design and writing. I also tidied up a couple other things, including removing some of the sub headings as we haven't ended up with enough content to justify all of them. I'm not sure how much more I will get to with this article before the review begins, but the main things I see as needing improvement before or during a review are: there could be more Endgame details in the Story section to balance it out; there could be details about other characters in the Character arcs section; the Cinematography section should probably be expanded or merged with the Principal photography section; and the rest of the article below the Writing section needs a general c/e as well. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:30, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'll be coming back to edit on-and-off. I'll try to help out by listing some sources. I already have a NYT ref from Markus and McFeely that can perhaps be used. I'll provide a list of refs that can be included in the article that can help out with Endgame details for the Story section, hopefully, in no particular order!
[2] -> "The writers spent about nine months between September 2015 and May 2016 putting together the shooting drafts for Infinity War and Endgame’s scripts." Markus and McFeely insist 3 hr runtime is justified
[3] -> Joe Russo cried thinking about opening scene, 5 yr time jump inspired from What If...? comic, reduced Thanos screentime, Cap lifting Mjolnir long planned by Feige
[4], [5] -> Women of Marvel scene,[6], [7], [8], [9] Dcdiehardfan (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
There are also a good amount of potential refs up top in the ref ideas. Most of them were cut during the reworking of the article, but they may still have use somewhere. -- ZooBlazertalk 02:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hey just of note, there are a lot of references above in the "useful" template. Might be worth considering adding any in if needed, or removing the ones that already are in article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Something else to note, there is a GA backlog drive happening throughout August so the chances of this getting picked up for review in the next month are high. That's good news, but if we do want to get a bit more work done first we may want to take back the nomination so it doesn't get picked up until we are ready. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Adamstom.97 I removed the nomination for now. -- ZooBlazertalk 16:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Adamstom.97 I've been working on the things you pointed out above over the last few days. I've added a decent amount for the Endgame story info, but I'm running out of sources I think. I added a little info for Black Widow in the character arcs and a little cinematography info, but I'm not finding a ton from reliable sources, so it may be best to merge it with principle photography like you brought up. -- ZooBlazertalk 01:04, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

The page needs to be checked for tone. I just replaced a lot of contractions (didn't, don't etc.) and informal wording ("movie" over "film"). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:20, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think I've cleaned up the contractions and changed movie to film everywhere except for within quotes. -- ZooBlazertalk 19:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think I'm out of refs for Endgame story info, but I think I was able to narrow the gap a good amount in terms of story info for each of the two movies. -- ZooBlazertalk 00:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@ZooBlazer Excellent work, I think you've basically used most, if not all of the refs provided, and I can definitely see the results as there is a lot more Endgame info. Now, all that's really needed is another CE just to ensure everything is good. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I might try to take a c/e stab if I can, though I know my on wiki time in the coming weeks might be more limited. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Favre1fan93 If your wiki time is still limited, then feel free to ignore this, but I was just wondering if you still planned to have a look at the article? -- ZooBlazertalk 18:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
I've honestly completely forgot and have decided to focus my attention on the Loki articles with that releasing. I wouldn't count on me looking over anything if you wanted to get a GA nom (though I know we are still backlogged waiting for Black Widow and Shang-Chi to be reviewed). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Alright, I think the article is in decent enough shape for a GAN and any minor things should be easily fixed during the review.
The backlog isn't too bad currently. Black Widow already passed and Shang-Chi looks like it has a reviewer, but they haven't started the actual review yet. -- ZooBlazertalk 20:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply