Talk:Tony Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe)/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Characterization" header

User:Brojam added a "Characterization" section header to the article. What does this mean apart from material already in the article regarding portrayal of the character? I have looked at comparable articles on fictional film characters (e.g., Han Solo, Max Rockatansky, Rocky Balboa, Michael Corleone, and Axel Foley) and I don't find such a section being used in these articles. It seems to me that this article should generally conform to the structure of articles like these. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:26, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Have a look at other MCU character articles: Phil Coulson, Trevor Slattery, Claire Temple. - Brojam (talk) 01:38, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. I will be working on a non-Wiki project for the next few months, but I will see what I can find for this when I return to more substantial participation in May. bd2412 T 02:00, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Just putting these here for future reference: The Evolution of Tony Stark in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Geek & Sundry; Want to Understand Marvel's Evolution as a Movie Company? Watch the Evolution of Tony Stark Onscreen, Screen Crush. bd2412 T 05:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

You should archive those to be sure.★Trekker (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

There is an archived version of the Screen Crush piece. The other one doesn't have one, and it won't generate. bd2412 T 23:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

There are other archive services that are allowed on Wikipedia as well.★Trekker (talk) 10:14, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@BD2412: I would recommend Archive.is and Webcitation.org.★Trekker (talk) 00:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Quality

Quality, while I agree that this character is probably notable enough for it's own article the creator has clearly focused on the wrong thing. This is little but a plot recap with no content about the characterization, development and reception of the character. There is also a lack of anything from the other media appearances. Se the article David 8 for a good example of an article obout a film character.★Trekker (talk) 06:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I completely agree. There is way too much plot in this article and like you mentioned does not focus on real-world aspects such as conception, characterization, reception, other media appearances, etc. Also many of the lines/paragraphs are direct copies from other MCU articles, such as the first paragraph in the 'Concept and creation' section which is exactly the same as the character description at Iron Man (2008 film)#Cast. Lastly, shouldn't this be called "Tony Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe)"? . - Brojam (talk) 06:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Wow, I thought for a second that that section was way too well written to belong in this article, well that explains that. Sorry to the articles creator but that's nearly a theft of content, and I don't see any atribution anywhere. This article will most likely end up at an AFD eventually.★Trekker (talk) 06:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Attribution is in the edit summaries, and there is nothing wrong with centralizing material on a single subject previously scattered across numerous articles. Some excellent avenues for expansion have already been identified, and there is already plenty of content here that is unique to this article, and to this version of the character. If this is not expanded upon, it will be due to laziness and lack of respect for the material, not lack of sources or content from which to build. bd2412 T 22:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but the article as of right now is still very poor and runs the risk of becoming nothing but a plot recap.★Trekker (talk) 23:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I suggest this move, once again, back to the draft space to continue its development. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea.★Trekker (talk) 18:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to boldly move it back, per our discussion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:11, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Since you have boldly moved it back, perhaps you could also boldly add some of the materials proposed to improve the article. bd2412 T 18:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I do not think that the character biography is excessive, given that it encapsulates information about the character from over a half dozen feature films. bd2412 T 20:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Should it be "Iron Man (Marvel Cinematic Universe character)" instead of just "Iron Man (Marvel Cinematic Universe)"?

Considering maybe it could be confused for the film or the film series otherwise?★Trekker (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Obviously Thor is Thor, Loki is Loki, but in the MCU, human characters are rarely (in some cases never) referred to by their comics codename. In the case of this article, the character is presented as "Tony Stark" almost exclusively. For this series of articles about MCU characters, we should probably be using their full names like Tony Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe). -- Netoholic @ 17:50, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I could see that being good.★Trekker (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I believe that the current title is most consistent with the supertopic title, Iron Man (see WP:CONSUB). If it is not a problem to have that article at that title rather than at Tony Stark, then it should not be a problem here. I note that Iron Man also presents the character as "lookTony Stark" almost exclusively. bd2412 T 19:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

This article is about a film character, and so falls under WP:NCFILM. Yes, its based on other media, but within this film series, he is referred to by his name. As the initial draft assessor, I'm going to follow the guideline and choose that as the correct title for this article. If there is disagreement in the future, it can always be addressed via an WP:RM. -- Netoholic @ 01:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I have moved Draft:Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe) accordingly. I suppose Hulk will stay Hulk (since the Banner/Hulk dichotomy is two separate personas, as opposed to a character with a made-up name). bd2412 T 01:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

In the films, they more often call him "the big guy"" than they call him "Hulk" (and we wouldn't title it that), but likewise, they also call him "Bruce" when in Hulk form sometimes (usually in a futile attempt to reason with him). If such an article is made, I think it too should be at least initially titled Bruce Banner (Marvel Cinematic Universe) with a Hulk (Marvel Cinematic Universe) redirect. Links discussing the Hulk can use that redirect, in case an article split is called for later. -- Netoholic @ 01:47, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

It occurs to me, also, that if the movies follow the occasional practice of the comics, at some point Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Peter Parker, and others might die or retire, and another character might pick up the mantle of their alter ego. Technically, this is already baked in to the Ant-Man story line, with Scott Lang being the second Ant-Man, with Hank Pym initiating him into the status, but the only one we see in action as Ant-Man is Lang. It would not make sense to have a single article on all characters who carry on such a persona, because the characters are distinctly different people. I suppose we will cross that bridge when there are two well-established individual characters having used the same alter ego. bd2412 T 02:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

We do see Pym as Ant-Man in flashbacks (Wasp too), and yes I would oppose merging them under a single persona. That may work for comics articles, but seems very wrong in the MCU. Also, it avoids confusion with film titles, as what prompted this discussion section. One other caution, is that we have to watch this series of articles closely still that only canonical info from the MCU is included, and that no information is assumed or included from their comics stories. --Netoholic @ 14:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah but remember in the first movie his identity is secret til he reveals it. During that time he was called "Iron Man" and it would be all the time if he had not revealed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.114.107 (talk • contribs)

Even if his identity remained secret to the world, the biography would be a biography of Tony Stark. bd2412 T 23:20, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Most times when the phrase "Iron Man" is used, its in reference to the suit as a weapons platform, not as a codename for Tony himself. You can hear this a lot in the hearing scene in Iron Man 2. -- Netoholic @ 22:44, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Iron Man isn't just in the MCU,and "character" is not included because this is Tony Stark's version in the MCU.

2601:205:4100:CB5B:80DE:E032:6B2F:D69C (talk) 23:54,June 13,2019 (UTC)

Article title

I just redirected Tony Stark to here. I can't find any notable Tony Stark other than this fictional character, so I don't understand why the parenthetical disambiguation "(Marvel Cinematic Universe)" is needed. Should this be moved to Tony Stark, with the resulting redirect at this page tagged with an {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, or am I missing something? wbm1058 (talk) 13:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• No, you just retargeted the existing redirect of Tony Stark here, which I have reverted because it changed a longstanding status quo without discussion. I find it disingenuous for you to claim that you "can't find any notable Tony Stark other than this fictional character" when it already had a redirect target. bd2412 T 14:09, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
• Agree with bd2412, this is a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT situation. As such, I've added the {{redirect}} hatnote to Iron Man. --Netoholic @ 16:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

To be clear, the primary Tony Stark article is Iron Man. This is a child of that page, about a specific version of Tony Stark that would otherwise just be mentioned at the bottom of that article. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Anyone who isn't familiar with these topics (like me) is bound to be thoroughly confused. A "specific version" of a fictional character? What the heck is the difference?

OK, don't call me disingenuous for guessing, but is "Tony Stark #1" a "comic book" character while "Tony Stark #2" is a "film character"? And while these appear to me to be basically the same character, you are disambiguating them to be different characters? Maybe you need a broad-concept article to clarify who the "real" Tony Stark is? Maybe things would be less confusing if this were titled Tony Stark in the Marvel Cinematic Universe which at least supports the idea that this is a variant of the comic book character rather than a totally unrelated character? wbm1058 (talk) 20:40, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Apologizes for any confusion. Tony Stark is Iron Man and vice versa but this version is commonly known by the name Tony Stark and not Iron Man, despite the primary topic for Tony Stark being the page currently at Iron Man. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Even within comics books, some characters have multiple versions (ex. Council of Reeds), but for WP purposes we tend to summarize all versions either in a main article (ex. Harry Potter (character)) or an alternate versions section/page. Occasionally, one version gains independent significance, accolades, and/or a character arc which is distinct from its published history - and that makes it appropriate to create an article which focuses on just that version (ex. this page, Joker (The Dark Knight), Robin Hood (Disney character), Rapunzel (Tangled)). -- Netoholic @ 22:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I would add, strictly speaking, that "Iron Man" is a comic book superhero whose alter ego has included a number of different fictional characters, the most prominent of which is Tony Stark, but with others including James Rhodes (better known as War Machine) and Riri Williams. bd2412 T 22:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it is that confusing. Tony Stark / Iron Man is a comic book character. Tony Stark / Iron Man is a film character based on the comic book character. They both have their own articles now, with names that line up with how they are commonly referred to in their respective mediums. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Reception

Why is it that Rogers and Thor don't need a reliable source for their reception yet Stark does? He's more popular than the two combined so his reception should be expanded. Those two don't have a reception provided by a "reliable source", it just is there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.114.107 (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Infinity War Edit

Nebula transported Thanos and his ship to 2023 and not 2019 as stated. Thehoodedface (talk) 13:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

This sentence in the article is grammatically incorrect:

"Downey was a risky choice made by the studio, prior to being cast as Iron Man he was a controversial figure."

Because "Downey was a risky choice made by the studio" and "prior to being cast as Iron Man he was a controversial figure" are two separate clauses, they should be separated by a semicolon, some linking word, or made into two separate sentences, such as:

"Downey was a risky choice made by the studio; prior to being cast as Iron Man he was a controversial figure."

Or:

"Downey was a risky choice made by the studio, (as/because/since/etc.) prior to being cast as Iron Man he was a controversial figure."

Or:

"Downey was a risky choice made by the studio. Prior to being cast as Iron Man he was a controversial figure."

Please fix this. 98.11.216.98 (talk) 13:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Or we can just delete the sentence (as I have) because (1) it's unsourced (WP:OR) and (2) his last incident was in 2001, and he was cast in 2007. Six years is a long time in Hollywood. -Musdan77 (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Time travelers category

User:Penguin7812 and User:JDDJS have edited back and forth on whether Stark belongs in Category:Time travelers. My view is as follows:

• First, it is incorrect to say that he only time traveled once. In Engdame, he went from 2023 to 2012(ish), and then made another trip further back to the 1970s. His trip home was his third trip.
• Secondly, he didn't travel through time accidentally or incidentally. He was the inventor of the specific technology that made the time travel at issue possible, and chose his own destinations in time.
• Thirdly, he interacted with specific past events, including interfering with his past self.
• Finally, going back to his trip from 2012 to 1970, he intentionally traveled between two different time periods that were both different from his "native" time.

Although this was not a character who routinely time traveled, he did knowingly and intentionally time travel, with control over his destination, and visiting more than just one period on the past. I would therefore categorize this iteration of Tony Stark as a time traveler. bd2412 T 19:49, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I created Category:Time travelers (I'm not claiming ownership of it). I specifically worded the lead of the category to say "frequently" (it's even bold). Even if you count each time jump as a separate trip (I personally count it as one single trip with multiple stops), that still wouldn't constitute as frequently. So as the category is currently worded, he clearly does not qualify for it. Yes, we can change the wording to be more inclusive, but I'm opposed to that. So many long lasting fictional characters have time traveled at least once in their histories (it would probably be shorter to list superheroes who haven't time traveled then to list all of the ones who have. If we include all of them in that category, the category becomes too long to be useful. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 22:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

I think there is a way to make some room for inclusion here. Suppose we create a slightly broader subcategory at Category:Time travelers in film? That would encompass only those articles that are a) articles about characters appearing in films, where b) those characters have engaged in time travel in the film. This would restrict the category from including the entire universe of comic book characters who have engaged in one time travel arc without themselves being a regular time traveler, while maintaining the inclusion of film characters notable enough to sustain an individual article who have engaged in time travel during one of their typically limited number of appearances in film. bd2412 T 00:23, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Category:Time travelers seems unfocused. For example, it is somewhat WP:ASTONISHing to see most of the main cast of Lost in that category. Its on the level of trivia to use that category for such a broad set of characters. The category should only include characters that you'd describe as time travelers in the lead/first lines of their articles. It should be for characters for which time travel is a core endeavor. I wouldn't classify Tony Stark in that category, nor many others that are there currently. For example, Max Guevara's article doesn't mention time travel at all. I'm not sure the Category:Time travelers in film helps at all. -- Netoholic @ 02:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Netoholic. It should be a core characteristic of the character. I've been trying to keep it that way, but it's hard to tell if it's a core characteristic for the character if you don't follow that fiction. I'm actually going to nominate Category:Time travelers in film for merging because I don't think it's a necessary category. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 02:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

It is a core characteristic of the character within a film, which is probably the most significant film for the character other than his origin story. bd2412 T 02:53, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

The film is rightly categorized in Category:Films about time travel, but I don't see it as core to the character, and so it seems trivial. We wouldn't put Tony in Category:Fictional astronauts just because he went to space, right? -- Netoholic @ 03:10, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

If we had a category for fictional space travelers, I would think so. "Astronaut" implies a certain amount of training with the intent of participating in a space program. There are many characters who spend a great deal of time traveling in space who would clearly be considered space travelers, but not "astronauts" (for example, all the characters in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, who spend most of their time spacefaring). bd2412 T 03:18, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Space travel is a core to the Guardians of the Galaxy, its something you would mention in an article's lead about them like is done so in Guardians of the Galaxy (2008 team), but not Tony Stark. -- Netoholic @ 03:21, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Delete request

In my opinion,this page should be deleted because none of the other Marvel characters have articles for their MCU versions. Their isn't really a page like this. There is no Spider-Man (Marvel Cinematic Universe) article,so please delete this page. 2601:205:4100:CB5B:80DE:E032:6B2F:D69C (talk) 23:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

That is incorrect. There are articles on Thor (Marvel Cinematic Universe), Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe), and Bruce Banner (Marvel Cinematic Universe). An article on Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe) will be made after there have been a few more films featuring the character. bd2412 T 01:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh,there is only a Spider-Man in film article. While the Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe) article come after Spider-Man:Far From Home? You said "few",and no other films featuring Spider-Man have been announced,so I am confused. 2601:205:4100:CB5B:80DE:E032:6B2F:D69C (talk) 01:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)2601:205:4100:CB5B:80DE:80DE:E032:6B2F:D69C,25:59 13 June 2019 (UTC)

No others have been announced, but it is likely that Spider-Man will appear in future MCU films of other characters (just as he already appeared in Captain America: Civil War, and specifically in future Avengers films as a member of the Avengers. bd2412 T 02:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Last appearance

Tony Stark dies in Endgame, but some footage from Civil War appears in Far From Home. Is his last appearance in Endgame or in Spider-Man: Far From Home? El Millo (talk) 00:31, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

• An appearance is an appearance, whether it is a cameo, archival footage, etc. If the character is shown in the movie in some minimal way, we can describe it accordingly. bd2412 T 03:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Someone please change this line (i cant because its semiprotected)

In the films, Stark is an industrialist, genius inventor, hero and former playboy who is CEO of Stark Industries. Bold textsomeone please change this to say "genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist" lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmmaleeGracePicklesimer (talk • contribs) 23:03, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Superhero as an occupation

Should we consider superhero an occupation in the infobox? Both this article and Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe) have listed it, but I figured whether it's removed from the infobox or not, it should be discussed. -- Zoo (talk) 04:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't think we should consider it. It's fairly different than "CEO of Stark Industries", "Soldier", "Nuclear physicist", "King of Asgard" or "Spy". Would you say "Supervillain" is Thanos' or Loki's occupation? I wouldn't.

I agree, not an "occupation". bd2412 T 10:45, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Iron Man statue to pay the tribute in Italy

Can we add this point to show how impactful the character is around the world. Ashokkumar47 (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• It doesn't belong in the lede; perhaps in the Reception section. Moreover, we would need a source, and one that makes it clear that the statue is of the MCU character specifically, not the character as generally seen in comics and cartoons for decades before the MCU was established. bd2412 T 19:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is clearly mentioned as Tony stark MCU character.

https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/iron-man-statue-erected-in-italian-town-to-honour-marvel-superheros-sacrifice-in-avengers-endgame-7310651.html

https://movieweb.com/avengers-endgame-iron-man-statue-italy-tony-stark-death/ Ashokkumar47 (talk) 04:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Date of (fictional) birth

I don't actually have a good source for the date of birth - here is an International Business Times article with the proposed date, but I don't know where they got it, or if they are remotely reliable for this. bd2412 T 03:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

It looks like they got it from this promotional S.H.I.E.L.D. file. I wouldn't rely on these. The date of the Starks' death is given as December 17, 1991 in this file, but Civil War tells us it happened on December 16, 1991. Howard Stark's file tells us it happened on December 27, 1991. They're not even consistent with each other. Reach Out to the Truth 05:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Right, those "SHIELD personnel files" are abundant around the net and almost every one seems to be fan-made apart from two included in the Phase One bluray set (which had Barton and Romanov). -- Netoholic @ 05:48, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

That date for his birth seems likely non-canon as it makes a few stated facts not fit together. We have a repeated, firm date of Dec 16 1991 for his parent's death and the video in Iron Man seems to put that event somewhere after he graduated MIT, so ages 17 to 21. Using that May 29, 1970 DOB would put him already 21, closer to 22 when his parents died. Also, later in CACW, its said he was home for Christmas from studying abroad just before their death, which implies he was actively in school. If that date is canon, its fine (its not unusual for movies to have date continuity problems and we don't have to explain it), but it needs the source. -- Netoholic @ 05:48, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

This being a fictional date, we could just say that he was born in the early 1970s, and that Marvel has been inconsistent in portraying a specific date. bd2412 T 13:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Don't think we can even say a general timeframe like that unless its cited (straightforward calculations that anyone could do are fine, but deriving our own timeframe would be WP:OR). Inclined to remove the 1970 date and leave it ambiguous, we can then just include details as presented, ie. graduated age 17, parents died 1991, returned and became CEO age 21, etc. -- Netoholic @ 15:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I have removed it altogether. bd2412 T 16:09, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I mean clearly it says they died in 1991 (all of the stuff says that despite different days) so it suggests he still born in 1970. We only know the year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.114.107 (talk) 21:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Adding another data point just for future reference - post credit scene of Iron Man 3, Stark says he was 14 in 1983. -- Netoholic @ 04:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I have put his birth year in as "around 1970". That should cover it. bd2412 T 22:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

In Endgame, Cap and Tony go to New Jersey on April 7, 1970. I think this is his date of birth. I think Tony knows that his father missed it and went back on that date. Thoughts? Noobmaster1969 (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

In the post credit scene of ironman 3, Tony tells Bruce he had a nanny at age 14 in 1983. That means he was born no later than 1969, possibly 1968. But definitely not 1970. He believes he is already born when he travels to April 1970 & this is why he shows obvious surprise when he finds out his mother is still pregnant. May 29th 1970 is a cover for a sibling birth. T.jay.G16 (talk) 20:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe change the image?

I believe Tony Stark should have an image of himself from the following films:

• The Avengers (2012)
• Iron Man 3 (2013)
• Captain America: Civil War (2016)
• Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)
• Avengers: Endgame (2019) MrCoolGuy159 (talk) 02:34, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Since most of the film-related media will not be copyright free, it would become progressively more difficult to justify inclusion of further images as falling under fair use principles. bd2412 T 03:02, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

His appearance barely changes from movie to movie, one image is more than enough. El Millo (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

hey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8F00:3F40:381F:C00C:BBD5:8D61 (talk) 22:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Addition of Tony's experience during Endgame

I would like to bring to everyone's attention that this page only has information about MCU Tony Stark's life till Avengers: Infinity War. I would like to be given the access to edit this page so that I can add his experiences during Endgame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canak111 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Not true. While the last section of his fictional biography is titled "Infinity War", it covers everything from Infinity War to the character's influence in Spider-Man: Far From Home, including of course Endgame. —El Millo (talk) 16:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Howard Potts

It seems like Howard Potts (Avengers: Endgame) is a noteworthy inclusion in the "aliases" section of the infobox, much like Natalie Rushman (Iron Man 2) on Natasha's MCU article. Airbornemihir (talk) 13:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Added. Airbornemihir (talk) 13:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Those 2 are not the same. Rushman was a cover alias for her time working with Stark, while "Howard Potts" was just something Tony thought of on the fly to not give away he was from the future. It's more a joke than anything. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:18, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Favre1fan93 Cool. Thanks for explaining your revert here (your summary: "this is not an alias") and for making a qualitative argument about the two aliases being discussed, instead of leaning on wp:other stuff. I think there's a qualitative argument to be made that Tony put a comparable effort into this alias to Natasha's effort into the Natalie Rushman thing. He carried a fake ID that he held up to his dad when saying "I'm from MIT", presumably with the name on it (although I admit I'm guessing here based on the idea that his dad would have noticed a dissimilarity with the ID) and also a jacket and tie to make himself look more like a scientist working there. Would you please bring the page back to how it was while this is being discussed? Other editors should have a chance to opine. Airbornemihir (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Tony fumbling around to create a fake name for a specific moment is not an "alias" nor is it the same as Natasha having an undercover identity fully fleshed out. Also, per WP:BRD and WP:STATUSQUO, the version without this included is what stays until any consensus says otherwise. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Favre1fan93. This is not an alias that Stark operated under; Romanoff had an entire portfolio of information under the Rushman name, and maintained that persona from her introduction through a good portion of the movie. This is comparable, I think, to the fact that we do not (and should not) list Councilwoman Hawley as an alias for Romanoff. BD2412 T 17:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I think both Howard Potts and Councilwoman Hawley are worthy of inclusion because they are key to important plot points in Avengers 4 and Cap 2 respectively. Aliases in general are important in superhero fiction and in espionage fiction, which are the kinds of things we are talking about here. Note that I'm not making some kind of overly broad argument to list Steve Rogers as an alias for Loki based on the Dark World cameo or something! (Although, it would be fun to see that revisited in the Loki TV series, but I digress.) These aliases, however, are all comparable. Airbornemihir (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

If they are key to plot points, they should be mentioned in the plot summaries. Frankly, "Howard Potts" is not at all vital. It was a borderline random name picked in the moment, and any other name would have been just as good in that moment. "Councilwoman Hawley" was key to the plot only insofar is that was a disguise being used in the moment. That is not a nickname or an alias any more than "Odin" would be for Loki, who impersonated the former for several years. BD2412 T 19:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I think the ‘nickname’ parameter would be more suitable. IronManCap (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

These aren't nicknames in either instance. BD2412 T 18:37, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Yea. Tony and Nat are definitely nicknames; "regular-sized man" and "Lebowski" are arguably so, but the aliases being discussed are not nicknames. Airbornemihir (talk) 18:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

In that case, ‘alias’ seems fine. It is an alias of his, even if only used briefly. IronManCap (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

This is also about notability. The character of Black Widow was introduced as Natalie Rushman and known by than name for most of Iron Man 2. Tony Stark was known as "Howard Potts" for like five minutes. If you check the end credits of Iron Man 2, you'll see that Scarlett Johansson is even credited as Natalie Rushman / Natasha Romanoff. Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information. —El Millo (talk) 19:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

At this point, multiple editors participating in this discussion have argued against including this alias while at the same time reaffirming that it meets the definition of an alias! Airbornemihir (talk) 12:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Is it technically an alias? Yes. Should we make the mention of it here? No. As Facu-el Millo said, it's about notability and we aren't an indiscriminate collection of information. This is something you'd put at an MCU wikia page, not the Wikipedia page. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

The solution to this discussion is found in the solution to this question: Are there reliable sources which describe "Howard Potts" (or any of the above-mentioned examples) as an "alias"? -- Netoholic @ 18:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Are you asking if they explicitly called "Howard Potts" an alias of Tony Stark? —El Millo (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I could only find this from INUTH, which I don't know if it qualifies as reliable. Regardless, it's about the notability (and I'd also say recognizability) of the alias, not just if it is an alias or not. —El Millo (talk) 18:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability is demonstrated when reliable sources note the fact. IF it is a notable fact, then there should be at least some RS that do state that directly. Otherwise, certain equivalent wording ("went by the name", "assumed the name", etc.) from multiple RS would be acceptable. This is why we Wikipedia editors don't have to debate whether its a proper alias or not - we just need to find RS that call it so. -- Netoholic @ 04:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay then. A search for "howard potts" "tony stark" shows no reliable results, at least not until the fourth page, only reddit and pinterest posts and things like that. —El Millo (talk) 04:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Likewise, I failed to find any using ProQuest, Gale, and Newspapers.com (available via WP:The Wikipedia Library). -- Netoholic @ 04:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2021

I would like to make his death shown Hayden leach (talk) 16:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hayden leach, please elaborate. What does that mean? bop34 • talk • contribs 16:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aasim (talk) 06:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Armored hero

I have a feeling that even if we can't add a picture of Stark as Iron Man, in my honest opinion the new profile picture should feature Tony in the suit unmaksed, so that way his 'normal' side can be shown but at the same time a little bit of IM in the mix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.170.113 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree, since that's what has been done for other characters such as Steve Rogers and Scott Lang. IronManCap (talk) 21:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

As Iron Man

The main pic should be of him as Iron Man. Despite the page's title he is still Iron Man. Just because it's called "Tony Stark" doesn't it should of his normal self. People come to this page to see Iron Man. He is still Iron Man no matter what the page is called. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.114.107 (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

He is Tony Stark. He may go by Iron Man at times and wear the suit, but he is Tony Stark first and foremost. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying the profile pic should be him wearing the armor. Pages with the name "Tony Stark" on wikis show the pic of him wearing the armor (ex. here, [[1]], and [(kind of, the image no longer exists)]. Iron Man 3 is the only movie where he isn't mostly wearing the armor (maybe Civil War too) but otherwise he is see mostly wearing his suit in the movies. So it's best the mainpic is him in the exoskeleton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.114.107 (talk) 14:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

As presented in the film, he is Tony Stark first and foremost, only called "Iron Man" in the press and in tongue-in-cheek comments to his face. If the infobox allowed us to place a 2nd picture, we could include one in armor, but since it doesn't, this is the primary one. --Netoholic @ 16:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Can't you guys edit templates? Then fix up the infobox template so you could allow to have a second picture. --Iron Man (talk) 12:11, 21 April 2018

I would agree with having a picture of him in the Iron Man armor if a good one can be found, since we have other characters in their superhero outfits. IronManCap (talk) 01:11, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Facu-el Millo and BD2412: I have taken several screenshots of Stark wearing the Iron Man armor in the MCU films and numbered them, which can be found here. Do please note that the fair use info and picture will be updated on the file when one is chosen. Any comment on which is the best to use? IronManCap (talk) 22:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging adamstom.97 and Favre1fan93 too. IronManCap (talk) 22:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

And @InfiniteNexus and Sir Magnus:. IronManCap (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't think the picture should be changed. What we have now is fine since it's a "Tony Stark" article. Save the armor for the armor article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, but I think it makes sense to have a picture of Tony Stark in the Iron Man armor. Steve Rogers, Sam Wilson, Bucky Barnes, Scott Lang, T'Challa and Natasha Romanoff's articles all feature pictures of them in their superhero outfits, so it makes sense to do the same for Tony Stark. IronManCap (talk) 22:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Not to mention Carol Danvers, Peter Parker, Thor and Clint Barton as well.IronManCap (talk) 22:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Starforce13 and Trailblazer101:. IronManCap (talk) 22:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Natg 19 too. IronManCap (talk) 22:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

And TriiipleThreat. IronManCap (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I also don't think that the image needs to be changed. But if it is decided to be changed, then I would choose #5, as these have him looking the most directly into the "camera". Natg 19 (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep the current Tony Stark image. Unlike other superheroes who can wear their suits as part of their clothes, the Iron Man suit is a machine that pretty much covers the person inside it. So, it is not a good representation of Tony Stark. And yes, even though people looking for Iron Man will come here, so will a lot of others looking for Tony Stark.... because unlike most heroes known for their superhero alias, Tony Stark's legacy is a lot more than being Iron Man. Many MCU storylines revolve around his intelligence, technology, wealth and personality. His suit is only a small part of his story. — Starforce¹³ 23:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, given there seems to be consensus for retaining the current image, I'll modify my upload and put it in the body of the article. IronManCap (talk) 23:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

middle name

Is there a canonical movie source for his middle name being "Edward"? I haven't reverted the change, only because I suspect they wouldn't stray from his comics name, but I also don't think we should make the assumption and should at least cite which film mentions it. If we can't find it, it should be removed though. -- Netoholic @ 19:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

• Found one clear mention, but its in a (non-canon) deleted scene (on Howard's file). Lots of character details in this scene, but I don't think we can use it. -- Netoholic @ 06:18, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

In Spider-Man Homecoming there is a picture of Tony's gravestone, and it's labeled Anthony Edward Stark, so. . . yes?

Macadamia of the LeafWings | HEAR ME ROAR!! | Contribs | My Guestbook📖 17:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

That would be Spider-Man: Far From Home, and that film wasn't released at the time so they didn't know. IronManCap (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hulkbuster armor

Why is the Hulkbuster linked if it redirects to the page of the armor in general. Plus, I don't see how the Hulkbuster is any more important than say, the Bleeding Edge armor. It's the fourty-fourth model of the suit so it still counts as an Iron Man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.223.155 (talk) 21:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

That's not technically accurate. If you see Iron Man's armor (Marvel Cinematic Universe), the Hulkbuster armor is a separate type of armor that itself has two different versions. Counting them as the same would mean replacing the Hulkbuster with the Iron Man armor on Bruce Banner (Marvel Cinematic Universe) or the War Machine armor with the Iron Man armor at James Rhodes (Marvel Cinematic Universe), which I don't think would be accurate. IronManCap (talk) 00:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

"More commonly known as Tony Stark"

Hi, I wanted to get some consensus regarding the naming convention in the article's intro as it appears to be up for some debate. "Anthony Edward Stark, more commonly known as Tony Stark....". Tony is a well-known short form of the name Anthony. In regards to this article, it is named Tony Stark, and so why is it necessary to indicate he is more commonly known as "Tony" - this is implied in my opinion. Real-life example - Al Capone (short for Alphonse). Another fictional and perhaps best example - Tony Soprano (short for Anthony). Neither of these articles include a "more commonly known as" sentence as this one does. Thoughts? Bloodyboppa (talk) 17:21, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I think the current opening prose is perfectly in line with MOS:NICKNAME and WP:COMMONNAME. I think we have to apply things differently with fictional characters than with real people. IronManCap (talk) 17:59, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree with IronManCap. It's fine as is. BD2412 T 20:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Childrens

Peter Parker (AKA Spiderman) and Harley (the kid from iron man 3) should also be in-childrens 87.68.159.154 (talk) 12:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Not his children. —El Millo (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2022

Archival footage not to be considered as appearances, but repeated images from another film! Because of this, the Iron Man has effectively appeared in ten movies!

These reference sources prove that Iron Man appeared in ten movies! https://www.cbr.com/every-marvel-movie-iron-man-ranked https://collider.com/ranking-all-the-mcu-movies-iron-man-appeared-in-from-worst-to-best 2804:7F2:5A3:F759:CD2:7B7F:6424:3B99 (talk) 14:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: It's unclear to me what you actually want changed. From what I can see, that's exactly how it's written in the article. ;; Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk  15:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Forget that I got it. ;; Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk  15:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)