Talk:The Incredible Hulk (film)

Latest comment: 1 month ago by Adamstom.97 in topic False history implied re: why Norton was replaced.

Good articleThe Incredible Hulk (film) 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.
Good topic starThe Incredible Hulk (film) is part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Phase One films series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 3, 2008Good article nomineeListed
April 5, 2015Good topic candidatePromoted
November 18, 2019Good topic removal candidateDemoted
April 21, 2024Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Thaddeus Ross

edit

I think the Future section should at least mention that the character of "Thunderbolt" Ross did return in further MCU films, such as Captain America: Civil War and Avengers: Infinity War. --2001:4C4E:224D:3400:470:FF80:80E0:13AE (talk) 16:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Carveouts to sourcing guidelines

edit

If editors would favour a special carveout from RFC findings of WP:GUNREL on a source - e.g. to allow special carveouts for usage of a a source found WP:GUNREL in a broad general RFC - the correct venue for such would be WP:RSN, where the RFC ran - David Gerard (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

False history implied re: why Norton was replaced.

edit

Placing a citation needed tag. If no change in a few weeks, I will replace with correct information and citations. Sterlingjones (talk) 18:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you have updated information supported with reliable sources then feel free to add that to the body of the article. The summary in the lead can then be updated if required. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think the lead sentence can be reexamined. It does seem like it's a very "cause and effect" statement that solely because of the editing disagreement, he wasn't brought back. While that probably was one factor, I don't think it was the only factor. I think Johanna Robinson's book may covered some of this, though I don't know if any websites published those excerpts. Regardless, I think some more sourcing on the replacement could be added down in "Future" to then support a refined lead sentence. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I've done my pass of adds from Reign of Marvel Studios and in that edit added in quoted material from Feige's statement on replacing Norton. With that, I've updated the material in the lead about it that I think better reflects all that happened and was known. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why does the lead section have to be so verbose about this though?[1] Clarify as verbosely as you want in the article body but the WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize, and going on about it at length in the lead section seems unnecessary. The lead section need only state that he was replaced or more neutrally did not return, specific examples simply don't belong in the lead section, that's not what it is for. -- 109.77.195.4 (talk) 16:32, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I would be fine for a cut-down version in the lead, just stating this should be okay: Norton was replaced in the role of Banner by Mark Ruffalo for future MCU content starting with The Avengers in 2012. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2024 (UTC)Reply