3911:
included on the film table. It's as simple as that. You state that there are other editors who have "explained to this in the past" but that is subjective. As I have stated there are countless franchise articles that use the story writing credits. It seems to me that you are merely trying to mirror the MCU article, currently. I completely disagree that story credits shouldn't be included. When a film gives "written by" as the sole credit that generally means that the WGAG gives sole credit to writing abilities to that one writer. When they split the credits between "Story by" and "Screenplay by" credits -- it's that one group of writers wrote the overall story (framework) while the other writers wrote the script (and contributed enough to be given credit). Ignoring the story credits, is ignoring a very significant contribution to the film.
2893:) continues to revert this section. The 'Related films' section has been on this article since its origin/conception (if my memory is correct). My first question/argument was and still is -- why don't we list each movie that Tom Holland's Spider-Man appears in the MCU, within this section? If the argument is that we don't list them in the table at least in pros format would more adequately detail where and when Holland's appearances as Spidey are. Furthermore, the MCU also has television series centered around the same MCU Spider-Man. With these series now also "RELATED TO" the SSU, my argument is to re-title this section "Related media" (or some other variation) and include subsections of the mediums by which the installment is released (i.e.: In film, In television, and so forth). The inclusion of the
3868:
table serve no purpose for this article, which is about the franchise and about information relevant for the franchise, not just a collection of details about every individual film. We list very generally what each film is about, its director, writer, when it was released. We then include information that is relevant particularly in relation to the franchise as a whole, such as the critical reception and box office, the developments of the production side of the franchise, connections to other media, etc. There's no need to list all creative heads in this article, as all that information is already included and talked about in more detail at each film's respective article. Lastly, when
Trailblazer said
786:
universe and plan to cross them over, and the latest interview says that Spider-Man will crossover with SMU characters. So we know that Spider-Man is out of the MCU and is going to join the SMU, but our reliable sources tell us that the next Spider-Man movie will be a sequel so they are not rebooting or anything. That means we need to list future Spider-Man films as part of the SMU, keep the MCU Spider-Man films separate, acknowledge that they are part of the same film series, and try to do that in a way that makes sense to casual readers. We also need to stop using that partial Pascal quote, obviously. -
426:) will be joining this universe, I've updated the article to reflect that Spider-Man is now going to crossover while crossovers with the MCU definitely seem off the table. I still think they should be kept in the related films table since they get discussed so much (and potentially will be retroactively included with the rest of the SMU), but other than that I think it is time to minimise discussion of the MCU so I have discontinued the controversial adjunct wording. I'm happy to discuss that and any other improvements here. -
75:
various parts of the article, I added
Nightwatch and Silk info while not showing it visually like we do on various other drafts (like Gamora, Groot and Rocket's appearances in the Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 draft), I added categories that can be used fully once it is an article in the mainspace, I added a portal bar due to almost every other film series page has them, and I removed the Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse and "Related films" sections due to them not being apart of Sony's Marvel Universe.
3475:, and two unspecified films scheduled for June and October 2023. This info has been continually updated with new up-to-date information, with the listings for MW, Silk, and the two 2023 films also listing Kevin Feige as a producer, while the listings also list several other producers of the projects and filming locations and filming times, with the MW filming info from PW of a July 11 start in Boston recently being proven correct with filming details revealed (that have been added to
31:
2910:, and Tom Holland's Spider-Man being SSU canon/connective tissue -- shouldn't these films also remain in the table as they have been? The argument for each of these could be made that having details in pros format is detailed enough with perhaps only including main Spider-Man films/tv series titles in the tables. My argument is still that this page needs more detailed coverage of the SSU's various connections to the MCU, the previous
2233:
In this case specifically, given the few movies that currently comprise this franchise, it's the same one way or the other, usefulness-wise. The table and the subsections are so close together and brief that even without scrolling they can all be seen. For consistency sake, I would prefer to link to the article, but I'm somewhat neutral. That's precisely why I pinged three other users to state their opinion on the matter.
2075:). The film overview table is an overview of our film list section here, and when someone looks at the table we want them to be getting a sense of the subsection to follow. Sending them straight to another article doesn't make sense in that context, especially when we could send them to the subsection that they were just reading the summary of and give them the option to click on the main article link if they so choose. -
1434:"Sony's Marvel Universe" is the name that Sony used when they announced Venom back in 2017, and they haven't publicly used any other name since then. "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters" is apparently what they have been using internally, so we include that as well, but until they use that publicly or give us a new public name for the franchise I think we should stick with the name that they have announced. -
3483:, PW lists Marvel Entertainment and its location and contact info with the production studios. Since the Disney-Sony deal was renegotiated, it was only a matter of time before they would both co-produce films. MW star Dakota Johnson had also linked to Feige on social media about her MW role, and sites picked up on that teasing his involvement. Some sites have reported on filming info from PW before, like for
3567:
some unreliable sites made articles on Feige's involvement via the listing on June 23 thanks to a YouTube video on this), or listed something they shouldn't have, and moved to remove it, or were told to remove it. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that Marvel
Studios and Feige's involvement was in the prior listings, and that should be noted. I also noted on the info getting out there at
801:
article from the Sony exec. They are not in the same universe or continuity, as everyone at Marvel has said repeatedly and the Sony exec has now said. In order to not confuse readers, the article should make this very clear. As Erik Davis of
Fandango said, the films canât actually cross over because Sony canât reference them - so itâs effectively not tied to them.
2736:"Spider-Man Universe of Characters" and included all the unconnected variations of Spider-Man. So, I don't believe they're necessary using the word "universe" to imply a shared / connected universe. It's more of just the Marvel IP. We shouldn't change what the definition of a "shared universe" is to service Sony's marketing tactics and use them as facts. â
91:
them to be set in the same in-universe continuity, reliable sources discuss them together, they are overseen by the same executive at Sony, and the very real possibility that we will soon have crossovers between them and the Sony's MU films and it makes sense to at least have a full listing in a kind of "see also" section at the bottom of the page. -
4006:, just because you say it is done elsewhere does not mean we have to do it here. And where are you seeing this? I am definitely in opposition to you continually ignoring my opposition and opposition from others such as Adamstom in the past. We have already explained to you why these changes you persist in making are not being done in this article.
3376:
3331:
1512:
2105:. What I mean was that, I have never seen this on any other article. It sounds like you're going for a 'table of contents' approach, which really is what the Contents pane at the top of the page is for. Can we get other insight into this from other editors too? Maybe there are other articles like this that are similar, which I am not aware of.--
1202:, production aspects here. Those films are being made by different people who have no intention of working in with this universe, and they are also not discussed throughout this article which is the main reason why a list of the related films is included. I know there are canonical connections here, but that isn't always enough for Knowledge. -
1884:
3784:, all the heads of each field within the production on a film are notable, the editor, the cinematographer, the VFX supervisor, the composer, etc. That doesn't mean we should include them everywhere. Director, producer, and screenwriter are generally considered the most relevant three. So the fact that the story-writing credit is
3946:. I won't argue particularly for or against including the "Story by" credit in the table, I'll argue generally against including creatives from the individual films in franchise articles just because they are relevant to each individual film, because they are not relevant to the franchise as a whole, so it becomes
3957:
of this article. I understand your argument that "Story by" is basically part of a "Written by" split between story and screenplay, so that's why I wouldn't be particularly against this instance, while it is still clear to me that, when choosing between either "Story by" or "Screenplay by", the later
3823:. Additionally "This has been explained to you many times before by myself and other editors"... where do you get this from? Story writing credits are indeed notable, as they are listed on the billing block of the film poster, and are detailed in the credits right near/with the credited screenwriter.
3218:
animated films here has no justification either, as there's virtually no connection whatsoever, and the reference cited makes no connection between these two universes othen than being both produced by Sony. Right now, the only films whose inclusion in a "Related films" table is justified are the MCU
2960:
There is 'relation'/connection to the MCU, so far as Tom
Holland's Spider-Man is concerned. Amy Pascal and Kevin Feige have both confirmed this. There is also real-world application between the film studios: Sony and Marvel. Additionally, Sony lists the 3 Spider-Man films as a part of their SSU. Some
2853:
This discussion carries over to what I stated below. There are real-world connections between the SSU and Sony-produced MCU films. What further needs to be discussed is how/when Spider-Man appearances within the MCU should be detailed here (whether in film table or pros). Since the above discussion^,
2232:
way, I just disagree with citing OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to invalidate the existence of multiple examples. Now, in regards to which is the best option, linking to the sections is a bit redundant given that we already have a ToC and it is more comfortable to have all the articles linked together in a table.
2164:
it is done in other articles is the definition of a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. You generally need to have another reason for why it is done in those articles and should be repeated here. I have explained why I believe it makes more sense to do it this way, can you explain why your way is better? -
1775:
I think this is enough to move the article and add the name to the title, but I also think it suggests another major change. The source clearly shows that the "Sony
Pictures Universe of Marvel Characters" refers to these films but also the MCU Spider-Man films and the animated Spider-Verse movies. If
919:
Here, your version of the lead contains extensive discussion of the MCU films that I believe does not reflect the scope of this article. So, could you please identify specific parts in my version of the lead that you disagree with so we can get them updated but keep the weighting more accurate to the
309:
This has been pretty comprehensively discussed already, and the answer is pretty clear: Marvel
Studios is not interested in these films, but Sony wants to connect them to their Spider-Man films and hopes to have proper crossovers in the future. Therefore, we have a separate article from the MCU films
3982:
I am coming back to this thread once again. While each detail about the filmmaking processes needn't be in this table, it is commonplace enough to have each of the writing credits provided by the WGA. As there isn't any opposition to the story by credits, I would still argue that this article should
3845:
You were reverted on this in the past and it was explained to you on this in the past in the edit summaries from other editors, which would be an implicit consensus to not use it. Story credits are not commonly used across these tables. I am not discounting their notability. Editors can find them at
3547:
I was explaining how
Production Weekly is reliable and accurate. Just because other trades haven't reported on it does not mean Production Weekly is inherently wrong in any way. Unless there is any report that debunks the accuracy of Production Weekly's listings for these projects, beyond just other
3416:
The article's claims regarding co-production are extremely dubious. No other news outlet has corroborated these claims at any point, and contemporaneous reports of the Madame Webb casting announcements make no mention of Marvel
Studios. It has been months since these supposed "announcements" with no
2579:
Any site can publish an "exclusive", but that doesn't automatically mean we then get to use it or can consider it reliable. Per what basically everyone else has said, we have to prove a site as reliable. Given The
Illuminerdi does not have an "About" page or appear to have any editorial oversight, I
2464:
I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm trying to find an explanation for what you did and do. It seems you were well aware already that all the other sources weren't reliable. You've been reverted a bunch of times for edits like these. Either you're doing it in spite of knowing that it's wrong, or
1633:
Repeating that it "could use some restructuring" does not change the fact that it is perfectly fine in terms of logic, grammar, and sentence flow, and in fact not starting every sentence with a date is preferable. Again, if you have any sentences in particular that you think need to be reworded then
1341:
Hereâs one way to look at it: Sony has complete control over Spider-Man characters and can use them as they wish. That means they could, in theory, have the Vulture in this movie. However, while this character would be played by the same actor, itâs not MCU canon and itâs not him reprising his role.
589:
Please point to my where in the Variety article Iâve not noticed. I pointed out above that the Sony exec says it is separate, like virtually every source on this subject has done. And no, Pascal didnât âimmediately contradict herselfâ. She said they are separate universes connected only in that they
574:
You are the only person saying that! Stop using it as an excuse to edit war with me! The MCU films are not part of this universe, that is literally what I said when I started this discussion. Also, the Pascal interview you keep adding was discussed and debunked at the time--she does give that quote,
3867:
This article is about the shared universe. We only list in that table what are generally considered to be the main "authors" or contributors to the films, being those the directors and writers, in these tables where we list all the films. Having those additional production credits listed in another
3031:
There are a number of questions, and apparent differences/reasonings as to what should and shouldn't be listed on this article. As I explained above, I would argue that a detailed explanation for what IS and ISN'T connected to the Sony Spider-Man Universe would be beneficial to: the average reader.
2817:
How? Per the third Marvel Studios film agreement, there is explicit mention that there will be some sort of connection between the SPUMC and the MCU. What, remains to be seen, but there is definitely sourced content to support there are connections between the two to warrant the mentions we do here
1326:
I agree that this should be included, but we just need to be sure that we are stating the facts and not making assumptions about these films and the MCU. Just because Sony can include references to their own Spider-Man films in these other ones doesn't mean Marvel considers these to be MCU canon. -
1287:
had a couple of ties to the MCU. The most "obvious" one was Michael Keaton reprising his role as Adrian Toomes/Vulture at the end. I have added his inclusion several times to the article, only for some editors to revert. I {{WP:BOLD|WP:BOLD]]ly re-added the character to the cast table, and I am now
1023:
Since it's been almost a week and I have not got a reply, I am going to be bold and restore the parts of my edits that I believe are not controversial per the discussion above. I will keep out the note at Venom and similar wording here that I think is the actual contentious content and hopefully we
127:
Executives at Sony have confirmed the official title for their potential shared universe as being called "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters" as opposed to the "Sony's Marvel Universe" brand we were given before. Since the former is the official title given by the studio behind these projects, it
74:
I have recently been editing the page to expand and improve it, making corrections such as removing parts of the Infobox film template due to them not being necessary at the moment, removed the producers in the infobox due to them not being producers on every film. I corrected links to the films in
3919:
I wasn't inferring that no comments meant that it was a consensus. My statement was that no one had responded/there were no oppositions, and so I WP:BOLDly made the change. I would additionally respond to your previous statements the same way. While this article is about a "Shared universe" as you
3765:
That's not how this works. No immediate comments do not mean there is an agreement to implement your proposed changes. Story writer credits are not typically used in the main credits by major outlets, and it adds excessive details to the table that can easily be covered for those who do want it to
3566:
has updated its Madame Web info to replace Marvel Studios with Marvel Entertainment and all its info, and removed Feige from the producers list, but kept the other producers and filming details in tact, and added Roberts. It seems most likely that they got word of the info getting out there (given
3439:
has proven to be very accurate in the content of their listings, and as the editor who paid for a US$ 75 monthly subscription to download the listings (which can be found in download files at my talk for verification on your ends) and added this information with strong evaluation, I understand why
2565:
No, it's the other way round. A source is unreliable until proven reliable. Otherwise, by your definition, a random site publishing unproven and undebunked false rumors would automatically be treated as reliable. Having occasionally published rumors that turned out to be true doesn't automatically
2186:
I'm not stating that purely because it is like that in other articles it should be that way here, but the fact that it is like that and hasn't been changed ânot even by youâ looks like an implicit consensus to do it that way. It's important to look at how things are done on other similar articles,
841:
Iâm okay with that as long as two things are noted: that the sequels arenât in the MCU continuity, and the Davis comment on not being able to mention them. Other sources might exist that confirm or deny that, but thatâs the most credible one I can find on the subject. The whole topic is inherently
504:
They canât even mention the other films, so the Bollywood model sounds right. Itâs presumably being called a âsequelâ due to having a similar cast, although a proper term might be a reboot given its in a separate universe. And to say that the MCU films are now SUMC films is patently ridiculous and
2735:
in that presentation which happened to casually mention SPUMC... a name that Sony has almost never used in public, there are no real reliable sources confirming the connection. Sony uses these things as just marketing tactics. I mean, they also run the spider-man twitter account which called them
2206:
You keep saying that you have reasoning other than because it is done at other articles and yet you also keep refusing to explain what that is. I am trying to discuss which way is better with you and have explained why I think my approach is the best, so why can't you just say why your way is the
2039:
states that the film table's film listings should be links to other areas within the article. This is the first I have ever seen of such a formatting. Every other article I have seen, that includes a film table, has direct links to the respective films' article. I want to hear thoughts/reasonings
1228:
situation reasonings, however especially given that Tom Holland's Spider-Man is the "centerpiece" of these two cinematic universes, and the fact that he is a main character in those other films - shouldn't they be listed here as well? Especially now, with the contract re-negotiations and the fact
981:
and the only change is that Marvel Studios is no longer working with them on the series, so they can't bring characters in from Marvel's films anymore. That doesn't change the fact that they are making a sequel, and we shouldn't let in-universe canonical issues get in the way of us saying what is
931:
sequel section that actually reflects the standalone article for that film, the removal of unsourced fancrufty stuff from the cast section as well as ordering it chronologically, and you have chosen the worse version for the references, which I had filled out and cleaned up. No reasoning has been
879:
The specific issue is saying the SUMC includes the Spider-Man film series that started at Marvel. Iâll take you at your word when you say that you didnât mean this to imply it is part of the MCU, but the wording implies that imo. Changing it to something like âfollowing the end of the Sony-Marvel
785:
has further quotes from the same interview, in which Pascal says the MCU Spider-Man films are in the "same reality" as the SMU and are a "signpost" for the other SMU characters. We also already have sources in this article confirming that Sony considers their Spider-Man and Venom films to share a
90:
Deleting an entire section without discussion is not a good way to start "improving" a draft. The reason that section exists is because those films are discussed throughout the articles, and we discuss the actual films of the universe in relation to them. Add to that the facts that Sony considers
3910:
it sounds like you are the one who is pushing to "satisfy the desired version of editor" (to use your own language). There are numerous articles about film franchises which include story writing credits in their film tables. The reason that they are noteworthy, is the reason that they should be
1551:
Further more, I have several times tried to cleanup the article. The "Films in development" section is currently pretty messy. Each movie has a jumble of information, with dates of each development listed at the end of the sentence (almost as an afterthought). This is poor sentence structure. As
1307:
It absolutely can be disputed. Marvel has said these films arenât in their universe and neither Sony nor Marvel have confirmed the casting of Keaton as Vulture - and even if they did, it doesnât matter since the SUMC is not canon. It would effectively be a different Vulture. Multiple people have
3735:
I have brought this up before (in my edit comments), and as-is this still doesn't make sense to me. The article currently has director, screenwriter, and producer credits. As credited by the WGAW, there are also story-writing credits for each of these films. They are clearly notable as they are
3502:
Production Weekly provides professionals working in the film and television industries with the most comprehensive production breakdown available. Our professional research staff continuously tracks and compiles up-to-date data on projects in various stages of development, both domestically and
1654:
Additionally, I have also edited the films in development section to clarify which incarnation of each character the project will be centered around. This is key, as there are various characters within the comics that assume an identity. By what basis, are we not listing which character we are
1587:
rather than prose discussion which is why I and other editors I know often go out of our way to put the dates in different places or use alternative wording. If you have any sentences in particular that you think need to be reworded then perhaps suggest some specific examples here and we could
800:
What this all tells me is Pascal has no idea what she is talking about, but given she does not work at Sony anymore this is not exactly reverent. Our reliable sources tell us otherwise, namely that Sony considers the MCU and SUMC separate, distinct universes, especially with the newest Variety
3493:
research editor to update film production information. Prior entertainment experience is preferred. Duties include research, phone calls, light data entry, interacting with below the line individuals and establishing/maintaining contacts. Research production office contact information and use
2265:
My reasoning would be that because there is a Table of Contents, which acts as direct jump-links to the different sections, a film table's cell links should link directly to the information in its cell. An example of this would be: the director's name in the table cell links directly to their
1776:
we are going to update the title then I think we need to adjust the scope of the article to reflect that Sony considers all of these films together. We actually aren't far off doing that now, there would just need to be some tweaking such as moving the "Related films" up to the other films. -
923:
In the development section, you have deleted a big chunk of text from the latest interview explaining what the future of Spider-Man and the universe is. No reasoning for this has been given. You have also re-added the bad Pascal stuff, and reverted a general c/e and format update to improve
2937:
Like I said, the MCU is not connected to the SSU. The prose in the related media section describing its relationship with the MCU (i.e. their deal with Marvel) is fine; a gigantic table listing all the films and TV shows is just excessive. Right now, the only film that is arguably somewhat
3045:: As stated above, if we include Tom Holland/MCU Spider-Man continuity content in the 'related' sections; why would we not include the MCU television series that also include Spider-Man? Wouldn't this only further establish that MCU Spider-Man is the same in both media franchise universes?
2488:
We do not need a reason to consider a source unreliable, we need a reason to consider it reliable, especially when it is called "The Illuminerdi". I have seen no proof that we can trust this source, and the fact that it uses the word "Exclusive" sometimes has no bearing on that. -
880:
agreement, it includes all subsequent Spider-Man filmsâ. Basically instead of treating it as a contraction of the MCU films, treating it as a sequel (for lack of a better word) in a different universe. The confusing situation makes this very, very difficult to word accurately imo.
575:
but then she contradicts it and goes back to her original interpretation (an interpretation shared by many reliable sources and Sony itself in the time since, as can be seen in the article). Using that one quote of hers as if she didn't immediately contradict it is misleading. -
324:
Where in the MCU article do you see "the wishes of the producers to connect to those films, sort of how we do for the MCU TV shows"? It looks like Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige will never have interest in connecting the two universes. Let's just keep them separate already?!?! -
860:
My concern with that Davis comment, and the CNBC article that expands on it, is they seem to be more questions than statements. I don't know if we could use either as a strong source to state that in the articles. It may be a case of needing to wait for a better source on that
293:
Just seems like it's all "vague talk" to trick people into thinking that there is any MCU connection or that there is any chance whatsoever that Marvel Studios wants anything to do with this. Pascal was corrected by Feige when she vague talked too much in that
3244:
comes out we'll know. If, for instance, Venom were to appear along Doc Ock and Electro, that would be a meaningful connection worth noting, and then the inclusion of the Raimi and Webb films would be more justified, but right now we've got little to nothing.
1081:
I think we've handled it fine in the article as of now. Everything is back to the way it was, except Feige has acknowledged that there will be some sort of back-and-forth with the character. We can add more here when we learn more about what that will be. -
1686:
This is a topic that has been explained to you numerous times. Just because that name is used in the comics does not mean it will apply to the film, so you need a reliable source stating that it will also be used in the film before you can add it here. -
1165:
Those may be "canonically" related, but they aren't actually related. The ones that are here at the moment are all Sony productions that are discussed throughout the article, including how these films are intended to connect with them at some point. -
590:
are based on Marvel characters. Everyone at Marvel has said they are separate, as has Pascal, and now as has the Sony exec mentioned in the Variety article. The SUMC has no connection to the MCU or Spider-Man: Homecoming or Spider-Man: Far From Home.
3511:
Please remember, we are a service to the film industry and as such we need your help in keeping the charts up-to-date and accurate. Films that have inaccurate information listed, or show no movement or updates within 90 days will be removed from the
3846:
the respective film articles where applicable. Not every film has a story credit, though every film has a screenwriting/writer credit, which should remain in place here. An article is not to be changed to satisfy the desired version of one editor.
1729:
This is a topic that has been explained to you numerous times. Just because that name is used in the comics does not mean it will apply to the film, so you need a reliable source stating that it will also be used in the film before you can add it
3487:, so I'm not sure why the Marvel Studios and other producers have not been reported on. I do stand by my contributions of this information, and these are not just any "dubious claims", they are information in an official listing which, per their
143:
The sources that we have only tell us that "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters" is the internal name for the universe, so the only name that Sony has actually used when publicly talking about this franchise is still "Sony's Marvel Universe". -
1360:
I have re-added the Deadline source as well as the official trailer drop IGN source (that comes with an interview with Leto and confirms Keaton as Vulture). Just because he is reprising the role (as in he is playing Vulture again) doesn't mean
864:
Since we seem to be agreeing on the general approach here, could you have a look at my changes that you reverted and tell me specifically what wording you think doesn't align with what we are deciding here, so we can look to improve that? -
179:
We need proof that the universe exists beyond a single film. With a sole film article we generally wait until it begins filming before creating said article, so I suggest that once there are article for two films set in this universe
3239:
post-credits scene. All the other media included has no meaningful connection to the SSU, other than being connected to the MCU. Now, it's likely they'll become meaningfully connected at some point in the future, possibly as soon as
1342:
Itâs more akin to Brandon Routh playing Superman in Superman Returns as well as in Crisis on Infinite Earths. Of course, we have no confirmation from Sony or Marvel as to who he is playing, so the side of caution must be erred on.
3528:
That's a lot of text justifying why no outlet has reported on this if it's accurate. Do you surely not think Deadline or Variety would have noticed by now? Production Weekly is known for not being entirely accurate with listings.
2765:
I agree with Starforce here. Any claims of a tie with the MCU are unfounded, especially given the repeated denials by both Marvel and Sony of such a thing. Marvel is in complete control over what is canon in the MCU - not Sony.
2905:
film series would also more adequately expand and explain this section - seeing as producer Pascal has described the studios' plans moving forward as a multiverse scenario. With characters from previous films showing up in
2566:
make you a reliable source. You need a solid reputation of consistently publishing accurate stories. Also, the fact that the article in question literally cites unreliable rumor sites like mcucosmic should be a red flag. â
2686:
are articles dedicated entirely to cast tables. Plus, this list is small enough that splitting it into three subsections is unnecessary. The format could be changed, I'll try it and see if it brings any complications.
1247:
Neither Sony or Marvel have said heâs the Vulture, and even if he is it could well be a different Vulture than in the MCU. Marvel, on their end, has been entirely clear that these films are not in their universe.
1818:
with Sony Pictures considering all the movies as one film franchise the question is, why wouldn't we group all the movies together? The fact that they're developed by different film studios can be discussed in
445:. They are âsequelsâ in the sense that Hollandâs and the cast are returning, not in the sense they are sequels to the MCU films and stories. I also reject to the removal of the Pascal comments, which confirmed
3920:
pointed out -- what makes up this "shared universe"? It's a franchise. A franchise of movies and upcoming TV series. The associated production details/studios/creatives involved, are all absolutely notable.--
3388:
2187:
and it seems like there's a precedence to link directly to the article instead of the section. Now, as I said above, we should discuss which option is better and then make the change to all these articles.
2978:
202:
Okay, so we have now reached that point so I think an argument can be made for this article to be moved to the mainspace. Does anyone watching this page think that we should not go ahead with the move? -
1523:
708:
Then why not suggest an improvement in wording, instead of deleting it, edit warring, and accusing me of saying something that I clearly didn't intend? We're all supposed to be working together here. -
1713:
what I stated, is that each article that announces these films has clarified which incarnation of the character/alias is being adapted. Clarifying which incarnation of the character is good form, m8.--
441:
The Variety source never says they are part of the SUMC. I have no idea where you are getting that idea from. Those films are exclusively MCU films and remain exclusively MCU films. According to CNBC,
747:
I did, on the Venom page (re-adding the Pascal quote), and you reverted it. I think it needs to be clearly established what this page needs to say about the relationship with MCU. Hereâs the basics:
3637:
2507:
I'm honestly starting to wonder if DMH should be topic-banned from these types of articles, given that he seems to acknowledge the sources he cited are unreliable and he's just ignoring protocol.
1919:
aren't on here? Also, what does everyone think of the ridicolous new name for this universe? I thought "Sony's Marvel Universe" or "Sony's Universe of Marvel Universe" had a better ring to it! -
400:
1756:. This name (or a variant) has actually been known for years, but some editors have insisted it is unofficial. Clearly now, however, the name is official and this article should reflect that.
982:
actually happening. I know it may seem confusing, but our best option is to literally just lay out the facts and let the reader interpret them instead of trying to manufacture anything.
2342:
line of the article, which I assume you've read. If you clarified here that The Illuminerdi is a reliable source, it seems you're already aware that every other source you cited there
2866:. Additionally, Pascal stated that each universe of Spider-Man characters/continuities is being seen as a multiverse scenario. I will ping editors to the continued discussion below.--
898:
Yes, but I was hoping you would be a bit more specific than that so we could actually address all the changes. So, here is a list of what you reverted and where I believe we are at:
951:
Adam, I indeed want the film to be a proper sequel, meaning a continuation, just like you and any other Marvel fan. But how can it be one if SMU and MCU are different universes? Is
624:
the SUMC âincludes the Spider-Man film series that began as part of Marvel Studios' shared universe the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) with Spider-Man: Homecoming in July 2017â
3406:
3343:
3039:: As stated above, there is a question as to when we include Tom Holland/MCU Spider-Man content on this article. What determines including the media here, versus when we don't?
2551:
the source should have a reason to be unreliable. The source has released information regarding Marvel movies and/or Disney movies in the past that was proven to be accurate.--
3214:
are even less justified. Just because Spider-Man is in one of them and potentially in the other one doesn't mean that it has a notable connection to the SSU. Including the
3788:
isn't enough to justify adding it to a table about a whole franchise of films. Every other relevant role not included here is already at each film's respective article. â
3302:
Honestly I'd get rid of the section entirely. There's no need to have a list of movies - prose explaining what little we know about the connection more than suffices.
1614:
I am not stating that the entire bullet-pointed paragraph needs to list dates. What I'm suggesting is that by listing the date at the end of the sentence, it reads as
2274:
that once this article is larger, it'll be more of an issue than it is now. I was simply wanting to discuss it, as apparently there is more than one way to do it.--
1794:
Actually, I don't think there is enough there to make any such change but this does seem to be enough to make the move so I will go ahead and be bold with this. -
1541:
937:
If you could go through these changes and make more specific proposals for how to move forward then I think that would be a big help in wrapping this up. Thanks,
164:
How much longer will this be a Draft for? It seems complete to me, or at least close to it, so I'm wondering how much longer people think it will be a Draft for.
2679:
2615:
1552:
these are projects that are in various stages of development - the sentences should state the date, that the update occurred in, prior to listing the details.--
2678:
is that the ones on this article aren't sections. This difference is because this table is part of a larger article on the shared universe as a whole, whereas
3202:
films in its marketing campaign. But the connection between the SSU and these two Spider-Man film series doesn't exist, at least not directly, so it would be
1935:
this is not the place to discuss your personal feelings about the name. As for those other films, do you have a reliable source to support their inclusion? -
3831:
typically those additional production credits are listed in another table. I was referring to those who are credited in the billing block, and by the WGAW.--
1834:
I just feel that we need a bit more clarification from them regarding which films are classified under which names before we go re-arranging anything. -
3069:: Seeing as the SSU is a part of a cinematic multiverse, and has been detailed as such by producers and creatives involved, why wouldn't we include the
2539:
I am not going to get involved with you, (do not twist my words) but I have not stated that any source I included is "unreliable". What I said was that
3548:
editors personal doubts, this material should be allowed to stay. There is enough information from Production Weekly to be verified in their accuracy.
3494:
targeted reports of upcoming pre-production projects. Confirm and update pre-production projects and verify additional information via phone and email.
2350:
added sources that weren't reliable? Because that would constitute vandalism in my eyes. This is far from the first time you've done this, by the way.
1292:
has corroborated this obvious reveal, and state that Keaton reprises his role. Given the source, this needs to be added and really can't be disputed.--
916:
Also at Venom, you re-added the extra bit from Pascal. I think I've already made my case quite strongly for why I still think this needs to be removed.
2683:
2619:
1583:
Putting the dates at the end of the sentence does not make them "messy". In fact, if every sentence started with a date then we would be falling into
782:
3736:
credited in the movies, but some editors refuse to include such a column. What is the reasoning that this table is edited to remove these credits?--
3585:
Or maybe the information was just incorrect, per Occam's razor. Confusing Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment is a fairly easy mistake to make.
249:
Now that Morbius is filming and so the Morbius article is in the mainspace, it makes sense to move Sony's Marvel Universe to the mainspace as well.
913:
doesn't count because it is part of the MCU instead. If you don't think it comes across that way, can you provide a version of the note that does?
755:
Spider-Man is now a part of the SUMC, but the previous Spider-Man films are not, and Sony cannot mention their events (per Erik Davis of Fandango)
2133:
3819:
actually, that can be how it works. If no one opposes a change within the month's time that I had proposed the change -- I made the edits per
1863:
1407:
3751:
Seeing as there are no comments opposing this, I am going to go ahead and add the credits for writers that authored the story to each film.--
3563:
3380:
2974:
2137:
263:
Thanks for the input guys. I'll go ahead and make the move, and if there are any objections from now they can contest it in the mainspace. -
3445:
2653:
Nope, it looks similar yes, but itâs completely different. For example, this is this articles table format: {|class="wikitable nowraplinks"
2588:
I've had similar feelings in the past regarding DMH's actions (here included) and do wonder if there is enough to form a topic ban case. -
2129:
2125:
3671:
1753:
375:
I don't think the change is needed just yet, as we don't have any concrete TV info. When we do then that change can probably be made. -
3641:
781:
I have already explained that the Pascal quote is problematic. The source that you are using for it does not cover the full interview.
137:
17:
3384:
3368:
3339:
3335:
3323:
1505:
404:
1100:: namely, that the initial offer was 25/75 and gradually increased to 50/50, with the final deal being the original 25/75 agreement.
3622:
2518:
1424:
442:
47:
3935:
Notable doesn't mean pertinent. When talking about Sony's Spider-Man Universe, it doesn't matter who was the cinematographer for
905:
you deleted an explanatory note that I believe is needed for casual readers who will likely find it confusing that we are saying
3440:
some find it to be "dubious" given it has not been reported on by other outlets. My rationale for this, as I have explained at
556:
Thatâs two Sony execs now saying it is separate. Can we please stop pretending this in the MCU or tied to it or the MCU films?
2885:
I have attempted to expand this section and more accurately depict its topic several times, while a particular editor (namely
2854:
Feige has stated that Tom Holland's Spider-Man will be able to feature in both the MCU and the SSU; Tom Holland showed up in
396:
2293:
There have been several edits that I have done on this article that have been reverted. One of those includes the fact that
1126:
Shouldn't each of the films that feature Peter Parker / Spider-Man from the MCU be listed here? Canonically, this includes:
3693:
In the "cast and character" section shouldn't J.K. Simmons be credited as J. Jonah Jameson under the Daily Bugles column?
2996:
2785:
Again, what about the current article's wording do you feel claims a tie with the MCU that is misleading, specifically? -
2664:
2626:
2727:
I think it's misleading to claim that Spider-Verse and MCU films are connected to SPUMC. Besides the casual inclusion of
3766:
find it at the article in the infoboxes. This has been explained to you many times before by myself and other editors.
2320:
Also, these topics will need to have various input from the editors who have been involved with editing this article.--
2057:
Also, these topics will need to have various input from the editors who have been involved with editing this article.--
1672:
Also, these topics will need to have various input from the editors who have been involved with editing this article.--
1569:
Also, these topics will need to have various input from the editors who have been involved with editing this article.--
1618:
and it really could use some restructuring. The sentences I am referring to were, the ones that I edited previously.--
2970:
2297:- a source that is cited/referenced in other articles (and has been proven to be reliable) - states that there is a
4003:
3126:
2858:, while Tom Hardy's Venom got moved to the MCU; Michael Keaton is confirmed to be reprising his role as Vulture in
2102:
2072:
1134:
952:
524:
38:
3568:
3455:
listings list Marvel Studios in the field for production studios (they provide an example of their listing format
608:
The MCU films ARE NOT part of the SMU. That is what I've been saying. Why do you keep insisting that I didn't?! -
105:
Okay, we can keep those. But you didn't need to rollback all of my edits. You could've just readded that section.
3988:
3925:
3836:
3756:
3741:
3176:
3082:
2986:
2927:
2871:
2556:
2454:
2325:
2310:
2279:
2110:
2062:
2045:
1978:
1824:
1718:
1677:
1660:
1623:
1574:
1557:
1297:
1238:
1189:
1155:
1391:
Can someone reference to a reliable source where Sony's movies are actually called this, or is it a fan term? -
4011:
3951:
3851:
3771:
3576:
3553:
3519:
3441:
3227:
trilogy. The connections to this trilogy of films have been made quite explicit, with Vulture appearing in the
2660:
2622:
1396:
310:
that explains the wishes of the producers to connect to those films, sort of how we do for the MCU TV shows. -
226:
110:
80:
2962:
1519:
3965:
3887:
3795:
3592:
3536:
3476:
3424:
3309:
3293:
3252:
3012:
2966:
2951:
2806:
2773:
2710:
2694:
2643:
2472:
2412:
2357:
2240:
2151:
1995:
1763:
1455:
1349:
1315:
1255:
1107:
1069:
887:
849:
808:
770:
697:
665:
633:
597:
563:
512:
459:
133:
1448:
If they are internally using SUMC, we should probably use that given itâs the closest to an official name.
3636:
Can anyone put kraven the hunter from filming to post production because the movie has wrapped production
3268:
We should only include what is actually confirmed and known right now. Pascal has made comments about how
2140:
of the MCU, which are the most similar to this one, we should link directly to the articles. Now, perhaps
1413:, "Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters" is the official internal name for the universe (I'm not joking).
1140:
962:
493:
3417:
corroboration from any actual media outlet. We really need to reconsider including these dubious claims.
3698:
3679:
3617:
2837:
2823:
2790:
2755:
2593:
2513:
2494:
2396:
2382:
2212:
2170:
2080:
2015:
1940:
1916:
1896:
1871:
1839:
1799:
1781:
1737:
1692:
1639:
1593:
1487:
1439:
1419:
1406:
I do think it originated in a reliable source at one point, but I'm actually not sure if it's official.
1370:
1332:
1207:
1171:
1087:
1029:
942:
870:
832:
791:
714:
681:
676:
The difference is the SMU Spider-Man films will be in the SMU, and the MCU Spider-Man are in the MCU. -
649:
613:
580:
431:
380:
341:
315:
268:
208:
193:
149:
96:
4015:
3992:
3969:
3929:
3891:
3855:
3840:
3799:
3775:
3760:
3745:
3724:
3702:
3683:
3655:
3645:
3611:
Production Weekly is a reliable source and I see no reason to doubt what Trailblazer says is accurate.
3598:
3580:
3557:
3542:
3523:
3430:
3361:
3315:
3297:
3256:
3180:
3086:
3016:
2990:
2955:
2931:
2875:
2841:
2827:
2812:
2794:
2779:
2759:
2744:
2714:
2698:
2668:
2647:
2630:
2597:
2574:
2560:
2523:
2498:
2476:
2458:
2416:
2400:
2386:
2361:
2329:
2314:
2283:
2244:
2216:
2174:
2155:
2114:
2084:
2066:
2049:
2019:
2001:
1982:
1944:
1900:
1875:
1843:
1828:
1803:
1785:
1769:
1741:
1722:
1696:
1681:
1664:
1643:
1627:
1597:
1578:
1561:
1491:
1461:
1443:
1429:
1400:
1374:
1355:
1336:
1321:
1301:
1261:
1242:
1211:
1193:
1175:
1159:
1113:
1091:
1075:
1033:
968:
946:
893:
874:
855:
836:
814:
795:
776:
718:
703:
685:
671:
653:
639:
617:
603:
584:
569:
518:
499:
465:
435:
408:
384:
369:
345:
319:
303:
272:
258:
244:
230:
212:
197:
173:
153:
114:
100:
84:
3694:
3984:
3921:
3832:
3752:
3737:
3391:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
3346:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
3172:
3078:
2982:
2923:
2867:
2614:
I think that the cast and characters table in this article should match others of its kind, example:
2552:
2483:
2450:
2368:
2321:
2306:
2275:
2121:
2106:
2058:
2041:
1974:
1912:
1820:
1714:
1673:
1656:
1619:
1570:
1553:
1293:
1234:
1185:
1151:
763:
This is widely supported by sources. There is not any real evidence of any connection at this point.
3123:. Additionally, other editors who have contributed to the SSU article within the last month, users:
4007:
3905:
3847:
3814:
3767:
3572:
3549:
3515:
3402:
3357:
2198:
2194:
1952:
1920:
1537:
1392:
1225:
1199:
974:
326:
222:
106:
76:
2995:
When I say they are not connected, I mean story-wise. The Sony/Marvel deal is already detailed at
2007:
644:...and it literally does not say that the MCU films are part of the SMU. My point still stands. -
3977:
3960:
3914:
3882:
3862:
3826:
3790:
3587:
3531:
3419:
3304:
3289:
3280:
films are connected or related to the MCU. Finally, I'm not sure why you think that just because
3263:
3247:
3158:
3110:
3008:
2947:
2888:
2801:
2768:
2705:
2689:
2638:
2467:
2432:
2407:
2372:
2352:
2269:
2235:
2146:
1990:
1932:
1924:
1758:
1584:
1450:
1344:
1310:
1250:
1102:
1064:
882:
844:
803:
765:
692:
660:
628:
592:
558:
507:
454:
336:
You misread my statement. The part you quoted from my comment is in reference to this article. -
330:
129:
2334:
The Illuminerdi was the only reliable source there, and its whole article is based on something
1180:
Right, I get what you're saying but technically wouldn't they be tied to the above stated films
128:
is to only be consistent and accurate that the page be renamed appropriately to the given title.
927:
Throughout the rest of the article you have reverted general c/e updates, a new version of the
819:
I think I agree, as long as we also make it clear that the next Spider-Man film is a sequel to
3134:
1146:
957:
902:
488:
299:
254:
2832:
They are also very much related in a real world sense since they are all Sony productions. -
2659:
Plus âintroduced inâ sections in this article are totally different from the other articles.
2144:
thinks those articles are incorrect, in which case we can discuss if we change our approach.
1859:
3947:
3876:
as an implicit support for it, which it is not. It is still would've been correct to make a
3720:
3675:
3667:
3612:
3484:
3118:
3102:
3094:
2833:
2819:
2786:
2751:
2737:
2589:
2583:
2567:
2546:
2534:
2508:
2490:
2442:
2438:
2392:
2378:
2260:
2223:
2208:
2190:
2181:
2166:
2141:
2096:
2076:
2034:
2011:
1960:
1936:
1892:
1867:
1835:
1813:
1795:
1777:
1733:
1708:
1688:
1635:
1609:
1589:
1483:
1435:
1414:
1366:
1328:
1219:
1203:
1167:
1083:
1025:
938:
866:
828:
787:
710:
677:
645:
609:
576:
427:
376:
365:
337:
311:
264:
240:
204:
189:
169:
145:
92:
3652:
3203:
3389:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters
3276:, so we should include that information. There is no direct confirmation that any other
658:
Whatâs the difference being âthe SUMC includesâ and âthese films are part of the SUMCâ?
3940:
3877:
3820:
3392:
3347:
3344:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#Sony Universe of Marvel Characters
2266:
article. Not to another area on the article that has the director's name. I agree with
1527:
3479:). These do not appear to be any typos or mistakes in my view, as for the listings of
3366:
3051:: As stated above, if we include Tom Holland/MCU Spider-Man - why wouldn't we include
395:
Since Venom's franchise and shared universe has a draft, then I think there should be
3459:), which includes the studio's headquarters and contact information specifically for
3166:
3150:
3032:
Seeing as there are a number of concerns, I have broken up the issues/debates below.
2862:; and various villains from previous Sony Spider-Man movies are going to feature in
3091:
Pinging earlier contributing editors, who have also discussed these topics. Users:
2674:
I thought you meant it looked different, not the code. Well, the difference in the
530:
and found absolutely nothing about MCU films now being SUMC films. What I did find:
295:
250:
3939:, it doesn't add anything of value to this article. It's pertinent to the article
2437:
I'm not going to get into it with you, but do not put words into my mouth. Users:
2071:
Other articles doing something does not necessarily mean that we should do it to (
3077:
Please explain your reasoning for either angle/view-point regarding this topic.--
2750:
What about the current article's wording do you find misleading, specifically? -
1184:? Especially given the fact that Tom Holland plays Spider-Man in the MCU films.--
752:
The two franchises are separate and distinct (per Pascal and the Variety article)
3716:
3142:
476:
418:
Now that it's been confirmed that future Spider-Man films (which are sequels to
361:
289:
Is there anything to imply that MCU stuff is anything than misleading marketing?
236:
165:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
3488:
758:
The MCU films are MCU films and are not adjunct or tied to the SUMC in any way.
188:) we should be safe to go ahead and move the universe page to the mainspace. -
3063:
features returning actors and characters and is centered around a multiverse)?
1233:
trailer (i.e.: These Sony movies are their own corner of the MCU). Thoughts?--
1128:
482:
3880:
edit, but that's what it would be, a BOLD edit, not an edit with consensus. â
955:
the answer? I'll agree with whatever you say, just it should sound rational.
360:
Shouldn't this use the Infobox for a media franchise rather then for a film?
471:
3506:
3456:
3186:
The problem is most of the connections you're proposing still don't exist.
1855:
1308:
taken issue with your edits here - maybe itâs not them thatâs the problem?
3497:
1634:
perhaps suggest some specific examples here and we could discuss those. -
1503:
3571:, where more hints at the involvement is being discussed for that film.
3375:
3330:
1511:
3003:
films are part of the SSU, save for the first one, which discusses how
2942:, everything else is pure speculation. And don't get me started on the
1216:
Long time since I've looked at this article, so I'm revisiting this -
3446:
Draft talk:Untitled Venom: Let There Be Carnage sequel#Marvel Studios
2799:
The claim that the MCU films are "related films", which is bollocks.
3284:
features, say, Alfred Molina, that it means the SSU is "related" to
1150:. Shouldn't they be listed as well?....or rather, why aren't they?--
541:
Now that one of its biggest properties is back solely in its hands,
470:
How can they be sequels if they're not set in the MCU? Or is it the
217:
I see no problem in moving this to the mainspace, considering that
235:
I also see no problem with moving this draft to the mainspace. -
2999:. None of the sources that you cited suggest that the three MCU
2946:
or the Tobey/Andrew films, which have zero relation to the SSU.
1615:
3670:
articles for upcoming future Sony Marvel films can be found at
3379:
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
3334:
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
2656:
And this is the MCUâs table format: {| class="db-d2lraXRhYmxl"
2449:
to be unreliable, especially if it is an 'exclusive' article.--
25:
1518:
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
486:
which have absolutely no connect with their predecessors)? --
4000:
it is commonplace enough to have each of the writing credits
1510:
2636:
It already does... Doesn't it? What do you see different? â
1096:
This looks good generally. I did add the new info from the
543:
Vinciquerra said that Sony plans to launch its own universe
3190:
connected the SSU with the MCU in its post-credits scene.
909:
is the first film in the universe. The note explains that
2346:
reliable, including MCU Cosmic. Does this mean that you
1752:
This universe now has an official name, and that is the
623:
2101:
I understand, but my statement was not meant to imply
1283:
Okay guys, let's talk about this. The new trailer for
2981:. Where are your sources that they are not related?--
2301:
film in development by Sony. By what definition, is
2008:
explicitly states that this is an uncomfirmed rumour
2703:
Changed the header, basically no change visually. â
1058:
Spider-Man is back in the MCU... again, for a while
3715:campaign. JJJ does not appear in that campaign. â
2160:The fact that you guys are saying we should do it
1024:can continue the discussion on that stuff soon. -
3367:"Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters" listed at
3206:to mention it. Now, your latest additions, i.e.
1062:This complicates things here, to say the least.
3322:"Sony Universe of Marvel Characters" listed at
545:using the vast array of Spider-Man characters.
123:Rename to Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters
2680:List of Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors
2616:List of Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors
2580:would call that the first of many red flags.
2006:Not only is the source not reliable, it also
122:
8:
2377:The Illuminerdi is NOT a reliable source. -
1229:that Michael Keaton's Vulture is in the new
1754:Sony Pictures Universe of Marvel Characters
3442:User talk:Trailblazer101#Production Weekly
1911:How come the proposed movie adaptaions of
3507:submissions to the Film Production Charts
2684:List of DC Extended Universe cast members
2620:List of DC Extended Universe cast members
2445:- please clarify, why are we considering
1466:By what logic? How is the name that they
3231:trailer after being the main villain in
977:, Sony is making a sequel to their film
3638:2001:16A2:C1C2:5E14:F009:FFE2:6F96:43C9
3059:film series details as well (seeing as
2997:§ Marvel Cinematic Universe connections
3999:
3873:
3872:, he was referring to you considering
3869:
3785:
3781:
3510:
3501:
3492:
3223:films featuring Tom Holland, i.e. the
2922:MCU tv series appearances. Thoughts?--
2675:
2338:, which isn't reliable. That's in the
2335:
1728:
443:Sony cannot even reference those films
401:2601:205:4100:CB5B:8D6C:665C:4BF0:81C5
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
3562:The latest Production Weekly listing
2881:Related..."media"(?) vs Related films
973:The "rational" answer is that in the
160:How much longer will this be a Draft?
7:
3381:Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters
1504:"Sony's Marvel Unviverse" listed at
18:Talk:Sony's Spider-Man Universe
3073:film series to some degree as well?
3711:column refers to the third season/
3672:Talk:Sony's Marvel Universe/Drafts
3336:Sony Universe of Marvel Characters
3007:will kickstart an SSU multiverse.
2543:(the cite I sourced) is reliable.
24:
3194:connected the MCU with the Raimi
1474:more official than the name they
1198:Yes, but we need to focus on the
451:separate, independent franchises.
3387:. This discussion will occur at
3374:
3342:. This discussion will occur at
3329:
2336:"reported earlier by MCU Cosmic"
2010:, so it is doubly unreliable. -
1882:
29:
2203:you're invited to participate.
1965:the source for these movies is
2465:you have a really bad memory.
1114:21:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
1092:21:39, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
1076:15:22, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
1034:12:26, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
969:12:43, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
947:20:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
894:15:15, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
875:14:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
856:14:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
837:14:37, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
815:14:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
796:14:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
777:14:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
719:13:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
704:13:52, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
686:13:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
672:13:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
654:13:46, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
640:13:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
622:Your edit literally says that
618:13:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
604:13:31, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
585:13:28, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
570:13:24, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
519:13:15, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
500:13:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
466:13:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
436:13:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
320:21:58, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
304:21:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
1:
4016:16:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3993:08:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3800:16:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
3776:16:20, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
3761:16:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
3684:04:47, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
3235:and Holland appearing in the
2961:of these facts can be viewed
1542:19:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
932:given for any of this either.
690:Your edit implies otherwise.
198:04:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
174:03:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
3746:04:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
3569:Draft talk:Madame Web (film)
3316:13:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
3298:06:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
3257:06:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
3181:06:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
3087:06:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
3017:06:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
2991:06:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
2956:06:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
2932:06:04, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
2876:06:11, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
2391:Yeah, I agree with Favre. -
1988:Illuminerdi isnât reliable.
1969:who have also announced the
1492:21:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
1462:14:14, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
1444:12:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
1430:02:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
1401:02:26, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
1375:22:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
1356:18:32, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
1337:18:21, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
1322:13:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
1302:13:50, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
1262:13:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
1243:13:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
474:-type of sequel (films like
449:that the two franchises are
333:) 12:37 AM - March 22, 2019
154:00:08, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
138:00:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
2715:02:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
2699:02:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
2669:19:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
2648:18:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
2631:18:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
1748:Article needs to be renamed
397:a page for the Spider-Verse
4032:
3407:21:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
3362:21:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
2938:"connected" to the SSU is
2417:22:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2401:22:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2387:15:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2362:00:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2330:00:43, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2315:00:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2085:22:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2067:00:43, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2050:00:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
2040:regarding this decision.--
1697:22:03, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1682:00:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1665:00:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1598:22:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1579:00:43, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1562:00:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
1176:10:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
1160:04:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
1135:Captain America: Civil War
842:confusing, unfortunately.
385:18:41, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
370:15:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
346:05:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
273:08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
259:04:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
245:07:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
3970:05:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
3930:23:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
3874:no comments opposing this
3870:That's not how this works
3725:16:50, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
3703:16:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
3666:A listing of all current
3656:00:39, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
3646:00:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
3599:14:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
3581:04:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
3558:01:43, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
3543:01:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
3524:00:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
3431:18:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
231:14:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
213:11:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
115:12:44, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
101:03:56, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
85:03:16, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
3892:03:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
3856:03:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
3841:02:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
3627:06:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC
3369:Redirects for discussion
3324:Redirects for discussion
2842:03:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
2828:17:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
2813:15:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
1957:the name is what it is.
1854:Here's some commentary:
1522:. Please participate in
1506:Redirects for discussion
409:16:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
3477:Draft:Madame Web (film)
3383:and has thus listed it
3338:and has thus listed it
2795:01:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
2780:01:15, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
2760:22:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
2745:23:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2598:18:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
2575:07:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
2561:04:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
2524:21:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2499:20:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2477:03:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2459:03:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2284:04:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
2245:21:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2217:21:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2175:20:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2156:03:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2115:03:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2020:21:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
2002:03:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1983:03:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1945:01:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1927:) 9:11PM - May 1, 2020
1901:21:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1876:18:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1844:20:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1829:03:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1804:10:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
1786:09:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
1770:02:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
1742:20:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1723:03:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1644:20:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1628:03:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
1526:if you wish to do so.
1524:the redirect discussion
1520:Sony's Marvel Unviverse
1365:is MCU canon though. -
1212:02:11, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
1194:15:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
3786:credited in the movies
3782:credited in the movies
3651:Do you have a source?
3057:The Amazing Spider-Man
2899:The Amazing Spider-Man
2733:Spider-Man: Homecoming
2405:Then it's even worse.
1515:
1141:Avengers: Infinity War
547:
3731:Screenwriting credits
3127:ActivelyDisinterested
2901:film series, and the
2610:Cast table formatting
1514:
924:readability and flow.
539:
42:of past discussions.
3496:They state in their
2723:Spider-Verse and MCU
2122:DC Extended Universe
1907:Movies not mentioned
1387:Sony Marvel Universe
1288:bringing this here.
4004:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
3958:takes precedence. â
3505:and state on their
2661:SecondLooneyaccount
2623:SecondLooneyaccount
2103:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
2073:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
1547:Sentence structures
3983:reflect as much.--
3200:Amazing Spider-Man
3053:Spider-Man Trilogy
2895:Spider-Man Trilogy
1516:
391:Spider-Verse draft
3952:WP:INDISCRIMINATE
3866:
3632:Kraven the hunter
3620:
3615:
3481:Kraven the Hunter
3450:Production Weekly
3437:Production Weekly
3412:Production Weekly
3267:
2516:
2511:
1588:discuss those. -
1422:
1417:
1224:I can understand
1147:Avengers: Endgame
903:Venom (2018 film)
523:Iâve re-read the
67:
66:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
4023:
3981:
3918:
3909:
3860:
3830:
3818:
3625:
3618:
3613:
3503:internationally.
3485:Echo (TV series)
3454:
3399:
3378:
3354:
3333:
3261:
3170:
3162:
3154:
3146:
3138:
3130:
3122:
3114:
3106:
3098:
2918:movies, and the
2892:
2818:at this time. -
2742:
2676:Introduced in...
2587:
2572:
2550:
2538:
2521:
2514:
2509:
2487:
2436:
2376:
2289:Reliable sources
2273:
2264:
2227:
2202:
2185:
2100:
2038:
2028:Film table links
1964:
1956:
1890:
1886:
1885:
1817:
1712:
1613:
1534:
1427:
1420:
1415:
1223:
967:
965:
498:
496:
221:is filming now.
63:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
4031:
4030:
4026:
4025:
4024:
4022:
4021:
4020:
3985:DisneyMetalhead
3975:
3922:DisneyMetalhead
3912:
3903:
3833:DisneyMetalhead
3824:
3812:
3753:DisneyMetalhead
3738:DisneyMetalhead
3733:
3709:The Daily Bugle
3691:
3674:. Thank you. -
3664:
3634:
3623:
3452:
3414:
3393:
3372:
3348:
3327:
3173:DisneyMetalhead
3164:
3156:
3148:
3140:
3132:
3124:
3116:
3108:
3100:
3092:
3079:DisneyMetalhead
3029:
2983:DisneyMetalhead
2924:DisneyMetalhead
2886:
2883:
2868:DisneyMetalhead
2738:
2725:
2612:
2581:
2568:
2553:DisneyMetalhead
2544:
2541:The Illuminerdi
2532:
2519:
2484:DisneyMetalhead
2481:
2451:DisneyMetalhead
2447:The Illuminerdi
2430:
2369:DisneyMetalhead
2366:
2322:DisneyMetalhead
2307:DisneyMetalhead
2305:not reliable?--
2303:The Illuminerdi
2295:The Illuminerdi
2291:
2276:DisneyMetalhead
2267:
2258:
2221:
2188:
2179:
2107:DisneyMetalhead
2094:
2059:DisneyMetalhead
2042:DisneyMetalhead
2032:
2030:
1975:DisneyMetalhead
1967:The Illuminerdi
1958:
1950:
1909:
1883:
1881:
1852:
1821:DisneyMetalhead
1811:
1750:
1715:DisneyMetalhead
1706:
1674:DisneyMetalhead
1657:DisneyMetalhead
1655:referring to?--
1652:
1650:Character names
1620:DisneyMetalhead
1607:
1571:DisneyMetalhead
1554:DisneyMetalhead
1549:
1528:
1509:
1425:
1389:
1294:DisneyMetalhead
1281:
1235:DisneyMetalhead
1217:
1186:DisneyMetalhead
1152:DisneyMetalhead
1124:
1060:
963:
956:
494:
487:
416:
393:
358:
291:
162:
125:
72:
59:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
4029:
4027:
4019:
4018:
4008:Trailblazer101
3973:
3972:
3955:in the context
3906:Trailblazer101
3901:
3900:
3899:
3898:
3897:
3896:
3895:
3894:
3858:
3848:Trailblazer101
3815:Trailblazer101
3805:
3804:
3803:
3802:
3780:Every role is
3778:
3768:Trailblazer101
3732:
3729:
3728:
3727:
3690:
3687:
3663:
3662:Draft articles
3660:
3659:
3658:
3633:
3630:
3629:
3628:
3609:
3608:
3607:
3606:
3605:
3604:
3603:
3602:
3601:
3573:Trailblazer101
3550:Trailblazer101
3516:Trailblazer101
3413:
3410:
3385:for discussion
3371:
3365:
3340:for discussion
3326:
3320:
3319:
3318:
3300:
3259:
3212:Marvel Zombies
3198:films and the
3075:
3074:
3064:
3046:
3040:
3028:
3025:
3024:
3023:
3022:
3021:
3020:
3019:
2882:
2879:
2851:
2850:
2849:
2848:
2847:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2763:
2762:
2724:
2721:
2720:
2719:
2718:
2717:
2651:
2650:
2611:
2608:
2607:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2601:
2600:
2527:
2526:
2504:
2503:
2502:
2501:
2428:
2427:
2426:
2425:
2424:
2423:
2422:
2421:
2420:
2419:
2290:
2287:
2256:
2255:
2254:
2253:
2252:
2251:
2250:
2249:
2248:
2247:
2199:Trailblazer101
2195:TriiipleThreat
2163:
2092:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2088:
2087:
2029:
2026:
2025:
2024:
2023:
2022:
1948:
1947:
1908:
1905:
1904:
1903:
1851:
1850:Name reactions
1848:
1847:
1846:
1809:
1808:
1807:
1806:
1789:
1788:
1749:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1651:
1648:
1647:
1646:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1548:
1545:
1508:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1481:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1393:Jack Sebastian
1388:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1280:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1123:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1098:Deadline piece
1059:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
935:
934:
933:
925:
921:
917:
914:
862:
760:
759:
756:
753:
749:
748:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
735:
734:
733:
732:
731:
730:
729:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
415:
412:
392:
389:
388:
387:
357:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
348:
290:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
223:Trailblazer101
161:
158:
157:
156:
124:
121:
120:
119:
118:
117:
107:101blazertrail
77:101blazertrail
71:
68:
65:
64:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4028:
4017:
4013:
4009:
4005:
4001:
3997:
3996:
3995:
3994:
3990:
3986:
3979:
3978:Facu-el Millo
3971:
3967:
3963:
3962:
3956:
3953:
3949:
3945:
3943:
3938:
3934:
3933:
3932:
3931:
3927:
3923:
3916:
3915:Facu-el Millo
3907:
3893:
3889:
3885:
3884:
3879:
3875:
3871:
3864:
3863:edit conflict
3859:
3857:
3853:
3849:
3844:
3843:
3842:
3838:
3834:
3828:
3827:Facu-el Millo
3822:
3816:
3811:
3810:
3809:
3808:
3807:
3806:
3801:
3797:
3793:
3792:
3787:
3783:
3779:
3777:
3773:
3769:
3764:
3763:
3762:
3758:
3754:
3750:
3749:
3748:
3747:
3743:
3739:
3730:
3726:
3722:
3718:
3714:
3710:
3707:
3706:
3705:
3704:
3700:
3696:
3688:
3686:
3685:
3681:
3677:
3673:
3669:
3661:
3657:
3654:
3650:
3649:
3648:
3647:
3643:
3639:
3631:
3626:
3621:
3616:
3610:
3600:
3597:
3596:
3595:
3591:
3590:
3584:
3583:
3582:
3578:
3574:
3570:
3565:
3561:
3560:
3559:
3555:
3551:
3546:
3545:
3544:
3541:
3540:
3539:
3535:
3534:
3527:
3526:
3525:
3521:
3517:
3513:
3508:
3504:
3499:
3495:
3490:
3486:
3482:
3478:
3474:
3470:
3466:
3462:
3458:
3451:
3447:
3443:
3438:
3435:
3434:
3433:
3432:
3429:
3428:
3427:
3423:
3422:
3411:
3409:
3408:
3404:
3400:
3398:
3397:
3390:
3386:
3382:
3377:
3370:
3364:
3363:
3359:
3355:
3353:
3352:
3345:
3341:
3337:
3332:
3325:
3321:
3317:
3314:
3313:
3312:
3308:
3307:
3301:
3299:
3295:
3291:
3290:InfiniteNexus
3287:
3283:
3279:
3275:
3271:
3265:
3264:edit conflict
3260:
3258:
3254:
3250:
3249:
3243:
3238:
3234:
3230:
3226:
3222:
3217:
3213:
3209:
3205:
3201:
3197:
3193:
3189:
3185:
3184:
3183:
3182:
3178:
3174:
3168:
3160:
3159:Facu-el Millo
3152:
3144:
3136:
3128:
3120:
3112:
3111:Toa Nidhiki05
3104:
3096:
3089:
3088:
3084:
3080:
3072:
3068:
3065:
3062:
3058:
3054:
3050:
3047:
3044:
3041:
3038:
3035:
3034:
3033:
3026:
3018:
3014:
3010:
3009:InfiniteNexus
3006:
3002:
2998:
2994:
2993:
2992:
2988:
2984:
2980:
2976:
2972:
2968:
2964:
2959:
2958:
2957:
2953:
2949:
2948:InfiniteNexus
2945:
2941:
2936:
2935:
2934:
2933:
2929:
2925:
2921:
2917:
2913:
2909:
2904:
2900:
2896:
2890:
2889:InfiniteNexus
2880:
2878:
2877:
2873:
2869:
2865:
2861:
2857:
2843:
2839:
2835:
2831:
2830:
2829:
2825:
2821:
2816:
2815:
2814:
2811:
2810:
2809:
2805:
2804:
2798:
2797:
2796:
2792:
2788:
2784:
2783:
2782:
2781:
2778:
2777:
2776:
2772:
2771:
2761:
2757:
2753:
2749:
2748:
2747:
2746:
2743:
2741:
2734:
2730:
2722:
2716:
2712:
2708:
2707:
2702:
2701:
2700:
2696:
2692:
2691:
2685:
2681:
2677:
2673:
2672:
2671:
2670:
2666:
2662:
2657:
2654:
2649:
2645:
2641:
2640:
2635:
2634:
2633:
2632:
2628:
2624:
2621:
2617:
2609:
2599:
2595:
2591:
2585:
2578:
2577:
2576:
2573:
2571:
2564:
2563:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2548:
2542:
2536:
2531:
2530:
2529:
2528:
2525:
2522:
2517:
2512:
2506:
2505:
2500:
2496:
2492:
2485:
2480:
2479:
2478:
2474:
2470:
2469:
2463:
2462:
2461:
2460:
2456:
2452:
2448:
2444:
2440:
2434:
2433:Facu-el Millo
2418:
2414:
2410:
2409:
2404:
2403:
2402:
2398:
2394:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2384:
2380:
2374:
2373:Facu-el Millo
2370:
2365:
2364:
2363:
2359:
2355:
2354:
2349:
2345:
2341:
2337:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2327:
2323:
2319:
2318:
2317:
2316:
2312:
2308:
2304:
2300:
2296:
2288:
2286:
2285:
2281:
2277:
2271:
2270:Facu-el Millo
2262:
2246:
2242:
2238:
2237:
2231:
2225:
2220:
2219:
2218:
2214:
2210:
2205:
2204:
2200:
2196:
2192:
2183:
2178:
2177:
2176:
2172:
2168:
2161:
2159:
2158:
2157:
2153:
2149:
2148:
2143:
2139:
2135:
2131:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2118:
2117:
2116:
2112:
2108:
2104:
2098:
2086:
2082:
2078:
2074:
2070:
2069:
2068:
2064:
2060:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2036:
2027:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2009:
2005:
2004:
2003:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1994:
1993:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1962:
1954:
1946:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1930:
1929:
1928:
1926:
1922:
1918:
1914:
1906:
1902:
1898:
1894:
1889:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1865:
1861:
1857:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1832:
1831:
1830:
1826:
1822:
1815:
1805:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1787:
1783:
1779:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1771:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1762:
1761:
1755:
1747:
1743:
1739:
1735:
1731:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1710:
1698:
1694:
1690:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1668:
1667:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1629:
1625:
1621:
1617:
1611:
1599:
1595:
1591:
1586:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1559:
1555:
1546:
1544:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1533:
1532:
1525:
1521:
1513:
1507:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1454:
1453:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1412:
1411:
1408:According to
1405:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1386:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1348:
1347:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1313:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1286:
1279:
1275:
1263:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1254:
1253:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1227:
1221:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1173:
1169:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1148:
1143:
1142:
1137:
1136:
1131:
1130:
1122:Related films
1121:
1115:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1105:
1099:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1068:
1067:
1057:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1003:
980:
979:Far From Home
976:
972:
971:
970:
966:
961:
960:
954:
950:
949:
948:
944:
940:
936:
930:
929:Far From Home
926:
922:
918:
915:
912:
908:
904:
900:
899:
897:
896:
895:
892:
891:
890:
886:
885:
878:
877:
876:
872:
868:
863:
859:
858:
857:
854:
853:
852:
848:
847:
840:
839:
838:
834:
830:
826:
825:Far From Home
822:
818:
817:
816:
813:
812:
811:
807:
806:
799:
798:
797:
793:
789:
784:
780:
779:
778:
775:
774:
773:
769:
768:
762:
761:
757:
754:
751:
750:
746:
720:
716:
712:
707:
706:
705:
702:
701:
700:
696:
695:
689:
688:
687:
683:
679:
675:
674:
673:
670:
669:
668:
664:
663:
657:
656:
655:
651:
647:
643:
642:
641:
638:
637:
636:
632:
631:
625:
621:
620:
619:
615:
611:
607:
606:
605:
602:
601:
600:
596:
595:
588:
587:
586:
582:
578:
573:
572:
571:
568:
567:
566:
562:
561:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
546:
544:
529:
527:
522:
521:
520:
517:
516:
515:
511:
510:
505:unsupported.
503:
502:
501:
497:
492:
491:
485:
484:
479:
478:
473:
469:
468:
467:
464:
463:
462:
458:
457:
452:
448:
444:
440:
439:
438:
437:
433:
429:
425:
424:Far From Home
421:
413:
411:
410:
406:
402:
398:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
373:
372:
371:
367:
363:
355:
347:
343:
339:
335:
334:
332:
328:
323:
322:
321:
317:
313:
308:
307:
306:
305:
301:
297:
288:
274:
270:
266:
262:
261:
260:
256:
252:
248:
247:
246:
242:
238:
234:
233:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
215:
214:
210:
206:
201:
200:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
178:
177:
176:
175:
171:
167:
159:
155:
151:
147:
142:
141:
140:
139:
135:
131:
130:Red Shogun412
116:
112:
108:
104:
103:
102:
98:
94:
89:
88:
87:
86:
82:
78:
69:
62:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
3974:
3959:
3954:
3941:
3936:
3902:
3881:
3789:
3734:
3712:
3708:
3692:
3665:
3635:
3593:
3588:
3586:
3537:
3532:
3530:
3480:
3472:
3468:
3464:
3460:
3449:
3436:
3425:
3420:
3418:
3415:
3395:
3394:
3373:
3350:
3349:
3328:
3310:
3305:
3303:
3286:Spider-Man 2
3285:
3281:
3277:
3273:
3269:
3246:
3241:
3236:
3232:
3228:
3224:
3220:
3216:Spider-Verse
3215:
3211:
3207:
3199:
3195:
3192:Now Way Home
3191:
3187:
3135:Mitchy Power
3090:
3076:
3071:Spider-Verse
3070:
3066:
3060:
3056:
3052:
3048:
3042:
3036:
3030:
3004:
3000:
2944:Spider-Verse
2943:
2939:
2919:
2916:Spider-Verse
2915:
2911:
2907:
2903:Spider-Verse
2902:
2898:
2894:
2884:
2863:
2859:
2855:
2852:
2807:
2802:
2800:
2774:
2769:
2767:
2764:
2739:
2732:
2729:Spider-Verse
2728:
2726:
2704:
2688:
2658:
2655:
2652:
2637:
2613:
2569:
2540:
2466:
2446:
2429:
2406:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2302:
2299:Spider-Woman
2298:
2294:
2292:
2257:
2234:
2229:
2145:
2093:
2031:
1996:
1991:
1989:
1971:Spider-Woman
1970:
1966:
1949:
1910:
1887:
1853:
1810:
1764:
1759:
1757:
1751:
1705:
1653:
1606:
1550:
1530:
1529:
1517:
1480:announcement
1456:
1451:
1449:
1409:
1390:
1362:
1350:
1345:
1343:
1316:
1311:
1309:
1289:
1284:
1282:
1277:
1256:
1251:
1249:
1230:
1226:WP:REALWORLD
1200:WP:REALWORLD
1181:
1145:
1139:
1133:
1127:
1125:
1108:
1103:
1101:
1097:
1070:
1065:
1063:
1061:
978:
975:WP:REALWORLD
959:Kailash29792
958:
928:
910:
906:
888:
883:
881:
850:
845:
843:
824:
820:
809:
804:
802:
771:
766:
764:
698:
693:
691:
666:
661:
659:
634:
629:
627:
598:
593:
591:
564:
559:
557:
542:
540:
525:
513:
508:
506:
490:Kailash29792
489:
481:
475:
460:
455:
453:
450:
446:
423:
419:
417:
394:
359:
292:
218:
185:
181:
163:
126:
73:
60:
43:
37:
3695:Snuffles513
3689:Daily Bugle
3282:No Way Home
3272:is tied to
3270:No Way Home
3242:No Way Home
3237:Venom: LTBC
3208:What If...?
3188:Venom: LTBC
3119:Favre1fan93
3103:Adamstom.97
3095:Starforce13
3061:No Way Home
3005:No Way Home
2940:No Way Home
2914:films, the
2908:No Way Home
2864:No Way Home
2820:Favre1fan93
2590:Favre1fan93
2584:TheJoebro64
2547:Adamstom.97
2535:TheJoebro64
2443:Adamstom.97
2439:Favre1fan93
2379:Favre1fan93
2261:Adamstom.97
2224:Adamstom.97
2191:Favre1fan93
2182:Adamstom.97
2097:Adamstom.97
2035:Adamstom.97
1961:Adamstom.97
1933:WP:NOTFORUM
1868:Favre1fan93
1864:CinemaBlend
1814:Adamstom.97
1709:Adamstom.97
1610:Adamstom.97
1585:WP:DATELIST
1478:used in an
1276:Vulture in
1220:Adamstom.97
783:This source
477:Housefull 2
36:This is an
3676:adamstom97
3498:about page
3461:Madame Web
3278:Spider-Man
3233:Homecoming
3225:Homecoming
3221:Spider-Man
3196:Spider-Man
3027:Discussion
3001:Spider-Man
2920:Spider-Man
2912:Spider-Man
2834:adamstom97
2787:adamstom97
2752:adamstom97
2491:adamstom97
2393:adamstom97
2209:adamstom97
2167:adamstom97
2142:adamstom97
2126:Phases One
2077:adamstom97
2012:adamstom97
1937:adamstom97
1893:adamstom97
1836:adamstom97
1796:adamstom97
1778:adamstom97
1734:adamstom97
1689:adamstom97
1636:adamstom97
1590:adamstom97
1484:adamstom97
1476:definitely
1472:internally
1468:reportedly
1436:adamstom97
1367:adamstom97
1329:adamstom97
1204:adamstom97
1168:adamstom97
1129:Iron Man 2
1084:adamstom97
1026:adamstom97
953:multiverse
939:adamstom97
911:Homecoming
867:adamstom97
829:adamstom97
821:Homecoming
788:adamstom97
711:adamstom97
678:adamstom97
646:adamstom97
610:adamstom97
577:adamstom97
483:Aashiqui 2
428:adamstom97
420:Homecoming
377:adamstom97
338:adamstom97
312:adamstom97
294:interview.
265:adamstom97
205:adamstom97
190:adamstom97
146:adamstom97
93:adamstom97
3948:WP:TRIVIA
3594:Nidhiki05
3538:Nidhiki05
3489:jobs page
3465:El Muerto
3426:Nidhiki05
3396:Steel1943
3351:Steel1943
3311:Nidhiki05
2808:Nidhiki05
2775:Nidhiki05
2740:Starforce
2570:Starforce
2348:knowingly
2228:It's not
2120:Based on
1997:Nidhiki05
1765:Nidhiki05
1616:Yoda-isms
1531:Steel1943
1457:Nidhiki05
1351:Nidhiki05
1317:Nidhiki05
1257:Nidhiki05
1109:Nidhiki05
1071:Nidhiki05
889:Nidhiki05
851:Nidhiki05
810:Nidhiki05
772:Nidhiki05
699:Nidhiki05
667:Nidhiki05
635:Nidhiki05
599:Nidhiki05
565:Nidhiki05
514:Nidhiki05
472:Bollywood
461:Nidhiki05
447:years ago
414:MCU films
61:Archive 1
3961:El Millo
3883:El Millo
3791:El Millo
3491:, hires
3248:El Millo
3204:WP:UNDUE
3167:Maxbmogs
3151:WuTang94
2706:El Millo
2690:El Millo
2639:El Millo
2468:El Millo
2408:El Millo
2353:El Millo
2236:El Millo
2207:best? -
2147:El Millo
1973:movie.--
1953:Cineplex
1921:Cineplex
1917:Man-Wolf
1860:Collider
1819:prose.--
1290:Deadline
327:Cineplex
296:â
Trekker
70:My Edits
3942:Morbius
3937:Morbius
3878:WP:BOLD
3821:WP:BOLD
3713:Morbius
3653:Liliana
3512:charts.
3469:Venom 3
3229:Morbius
3067:Topic 4
3049:Topic 3
3043:Topic 2
3037:Topic 1
2860:Morbius
2856:Venom 2
2197:, and
2162:because
1410:Variety
1363:Morbius
1285:Morbius
1278:Morbius
1231:Morbius
1182:as well
528:article
526:Variety
356:Infobox
251:New9374
219:Morbius
186:Morbius
39:archive
3944:(film)
3717:SirDot
3509:, and
3163:, and
3143:YgorD3
3115:, and
2977:, and
2136:, and
964:(talk)
495:(talk)
362:ARZ100
237:Brojam
166:ARZ100
3668:draft
3500:that
3274:Venom
2344:isn't
2340:first
2134:Three
1888:Added
1730:here.
920:body?
907:Venom
182:Venom
16:<
4012:talk
3989:talk
3966:talk
3950:and
3926:talk
3888:talk
3852:talk
3837:talk
3796:talk
3772:talk
3757:talk
3742:talk
3721:talk
3699:talk
3680:talk
3642:talk
3577:talk
3564:here
3554:talk
3520:talk
3473:Silk
3457:here
3444:and
3403:talk
3358:talk
3294:talk
3253:talk
3210:and
3177:talk
3083:talk
3055:and
3013:talk
2987:talk
2979:here
2975:here
2971:here
2967:here
2963:here
2952:talk
2928:talk
2872:talk
2838:talk
2824:talk
2791:talk
2756:talk
2731:and
2711:talk
2695:talk
2682:and
2665:talk
2644:talk
2627:talk
2594:talk
2557:talk
2495:talk
2473:talk
2455:talk
2441:and
2413:talk
2397:talk
2383:talk
2371:and
2358:talk
2326:talk
2311:talk
2280:talk
2241:talk
2213:talk
2171:talk
2152:talk
2138:Four
2124:and
2111:talk
2081:talk
2063:talk
2046:talk
2016:talk
1979:talk
1941:talk
1931:Per
1925:talk
1915:and
1913:Solo
1897:talk
1872:talk
1866:. -
1840:talk
1825:talk
1800:talk
1782:talk
1738:talk
1719:talk
1693:talk
1678:talk
1661:talk
1640:talk
1624:talk
1594:talk
1575:talk
1558:talk
1538:talk
1488:talk
1482:. -
1470:use
1440:talk
1397:talk
1371:talk
1333:talk
1298:talk
1239:talk
1208:talk
1190:talk
1172:talk
1156:talk
1144:and
1088:talk
1030:talk
943:talk
871:talk
861:one.
833:talk
827:. -
823:and
792:talk
715:talk
682:talk
650:talk
614:talk
581:talk
480:and
432:talk
422:and
405:talk
381:talk
366:talk
342:talk
331:talk
316:talk
300:talk
269:talk
255:talk
241:talk
227:talk
209:talk
194:talk
184:and
170:talk
150:talk
134:talk
111:talk
97:talk
81:talk
3619:BRO
3614:JOE
3589:Toa
3533:Toa
3421:Toa
3306:Toa
3171:.--
2803:Toa
2770:Toa
2618:or
2515:BRO
2510:JOE
2130:Two
1992:Toa
1856:io9
1760:Toa
1452:Toa
1421:BRO
1416:JOE
1346:Toa
1312:Toa
1252:Toa
1104:Toa
1066:Toa
901:At
884:Toa
846:Toa
805:Toa
767:Toa
694:Toa
662:Toa
630:Toa
594:Toa
560:Toa
509:Toa
456:Toa
4014:)
4002:"
3991:)
3968:)
3928:)
3890:)
3854:)
3839:)
3798:)
3774:)
3759:)
3744:)
3723:)
3701:)
3682:)
3644:)
3624:64
3579:)
3556:)
3522:)
3514:.
3471:,
3467:,
3463:,
3453:'s
3448:,
3405:)
3360:)
3296:)
3288:.
3255:)
3179:)
3155:,
3147:,
3139:,
3131:,
3107:,
3099:,
3085:)
3015:)
2989:)
2973:,
2969:,
2965:,
2954:)
2930:)
2897:,
2874:)
2840:)
2826:)
2793:)
2758:)
2713:)
2697:)
2667:)
2646:)
2629:)
2596:)
2559:)
2520:64
2497:)
2475:)
2457:)
2415:)
2399:)
2385:)
2360:)
2328:)
2313:)
2282:)
2243:)
2230:my
2215:)
2193:,
2173:)
2154:)
2132:,
2128:,
2113:)
2083:)
2065:)
2048:)
2018:)
1981:)
1943:)
1899:)
1891:-
1874:)
1862:,
1858:,
1842:)
1827:)
1802:)
1784:)
1740:)
1732:-
1721:)
1695:)
1680:)
1663:)
1642:)
1626:)
1596:)
1577:)
1560:)
1540:)
1490:)
1442:)
1426:64
1399:)
1373:)
1335:)
1300:)
1241:)
1210:)
1192:)
1174:)
1158:)
1138:,
1132:,
1090:)
1032:)
945:)
873:)
835:)
794:)
717:)
684:)
652:)
626:.
616:)
583:)
434:)
407:)
399:.
383:)
368:)
344:)
318:)
302:)
271:)
257:)
243:)
229:)
211:)
196:)
172:)
152:)
136:)
113:)
99:)
83:)
4010:(
3998:"
3987:(
3980::
3976:@
3964:(
3924:(
3917::
3913:@
3908::
3904:@
3886:(
3865:)
3861:(
3850:(
3835:(
3829::
3825:@
3817::
3813:@
3794:(
3770:(
3755:(
3740:(
3719:(
3697:(
3678:(
3640:(
3575:(
3552:(
3518:(
3401:(
3356:(
3292:(
3266:)
3262:(
3251:(
3245:â
3175:(
3169::
3165:@
3161::
3157:@
3153::
3149:@
3145::
3141:@
3137::
3133:@
3129::
3125:@
3121::
3117:@
3113::
3109:@
3105::
3101:@
3097::
3093:@
3081:(
3011:(
2985:(
2950:(
2926:(
2891::
2887:@
2870:(
2836:(
2822:(
2789:(
2754:(
2709:(
2693:(
2687:â
2663:(
2642:(
2625:(
2592:(
2586::
2582:@
2555:(
2549::
2545:@
2537::
2533:@
2493:(
2486::
2482:@
2471:(
2453:(
2435::
2431:@
2411:(
2395:(
2381:(
2375::
2367:@
2356:(
2324:(
2309:(
2278:(
2272::
2268:@
2263::
2259:@
2239:(
2226::
2222:@
2211:(
2201::
2189:@
2184::
2180:@
2169:(
2150:(
2109:(
2099::
2095:@
2079:(
2061:(
2044:(
2037::
2033:@
2014:(
1977:(
1963::
1959:@
1955::
1951:@
1939:(
1923:(
1895:(
1870:(
1838:(
1823:(
1816::
1812:@
1798:(
1780:(
1736:(
1717:(
1711::
1707:@
1691:(
1676:(
1659:(
1638:(
1622:(
1612::
1608:@
1592:(
1573:(
1556:(
1536:(
1486:(
1438:(
1395:(
1369:(
1331:(
1296:(
1237:(
1222::
1218:@
1206:(
1188:(
1170:(
1154:(
1086:(
1028:(
941:(
869:(
831:(
790:(
713:(
680:(
648:(
612:(
579:(
430:(
403:(
379:(
364:(
340:(
329:(
314:(
298:(
267:(
253:(
239:(
225:(
207:(
192:(
180:(
168:(
148:(
132:(
109:(
95:(
79:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.