Talk:X-Men (film series)/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Protected edit request on 12 May 2017

New information stating Professor X (James McAvoy) won't be appearing in New Mutants as previously thought. Article here [1] Brocicle (talk) 18:15, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Why do you need to mention that in the article? He was never officially confirmed to appear in the film. And as been said before, comicbook.com isn't a reliable site to use as a source for Wikipedia articles.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 02:40, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Because it states Professor X is appearing. Thought the information of James McAcoy not reprising his role is relevant. Here's more sources for your reliable site needs [2] [3]. Brocicle (talk) 09:50, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

then it's an information that turned out to be false. Fox, the director, the producers, theactor himself never officially announced Mcavoy would appear in the film and we don't know for certain if he won't really appear in the film. So it's not needed.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

The article currently states "Charles Xavier / Professor X" under the "New Mutants (2018)", so the article does need updating, so the protected edit request is clearly necessary. Please understand the request before you oppose everything that comes across this talk page. Cheers. -- Alex^TW 10:33, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Alex, at least someone can understand why the update is necessary. Brocicle (talk) 11:33, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Just remove the name.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 12:23, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

That is what the protected edit request is requesting, to remove the name. The additional content is supporting sources against what is given in the article. -- Alex^TW 12:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Why remove the name? Just add that on 11 May 2017 it was confirmed that James McAvoy would not be reprising his role of Charles Xavier / Professor X in the New Mutants. You can't remove information that a source has previously stated. Stop policing. Brocicle (talk) 15:15, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

I find it pretty amusing that someone could totally misread the edit request in the manner that he did and then immediately be corrected by the user who made the request. Reminds me of the ANI thread that brought me here, where the two complainants were and are in disagreement as to whom they are reporting. Anyway, @Brocicle:, we don't have to include any particular pieces of information in this article that we don't want to. WP:V is a minimum requirement for including information; it does not place us under obligation to include all information that can be found in reliable sources. Such information can be removed for a bunch of reasons: in this case, the information is out of date, and the source was reliable for that information when it was new and other sources could not be found that contradicted it. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't know how many timesit has to be said professor X will appear as the source originally stated so that does not need to be removed because it is accurate. James McAvoy will not be reprising his role as Professor X for New Mutants which is what my edit request was, to add that information Brocicle (talk) 22:02, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

There's no need to shout. And none of your comments above mine said that. I saw you saying the same thing over and over again ("The source says he is in the film, so we can't remove it"), and replied to that. I see (now that you have shouted at me that you have said that multiple times, causing me to look a bit more closely at your comments up and down this discussion), that you did in fact state in one of your comments below here that you think Professor X will be in the film but won't be played by McAvoy. But the majority of your comments do not say that; they imply there is a contradiction in sources. Next time you make an edit request, you should really think about exactly what you want the edit to say, and make sure that your words will not be misinterpreted. In this case, multiple users independently misinterpreted you, and even in your attempts to correct them (Hotwiki, Alex and me, but not 50.232 below) you did not make the problem any clearer. I have no opinion on whether ComicBook.com is a reliable source (I don't much care). I thought I was commenting on whether "sourced" material can be removed as coming from outdated sources based on the judgement calls of Wikipedians (to which the answer is almost always "yes", as long as no one disagrees). I'll bite my tongue now that I realize that's not what it's about. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:12, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Bolding a statement does not equal shouting. Next time, read the entire discussion before placing a comment half way through thinking you know everything about it. Alex understood fully so not sure why he's grouped in with those. Also, I never implied a contradiction of sourcess nor dod I state that the sources said McAvoy was in the film so don't put words where there are none for your own benefit. If that was the case I would have said the sources are wrong. Biting your tongue is a good idea, I suggest you put that into use before jumping to conclusions. Brocicle (talk) 10:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Bolding a statement does not equal shouting. Yeah, when you get a formal warning, maybe even a sanction, for constantly "shouting" (read: bolding text you really want the person to pay attention to because you feel you are being forced to repeat yourself), your view on that point will change. Mine did. That was three years ago and I could tell you exactly who brought it up and where, off the top of my head. Next time, read the entire discussion before placing a comment half way through thinking you know everything about it. Meh. I read you saying the same thing a bunch of times, and it seemed to be in line with an apparently common misconception that Wikipedians don't have editorial freedom to disregard "verifiable" material from outdated sources. The fact that a super-careful reading of one of your later responses would have caused me to realize that that was not what you were doing. I never implied a contradiction of sourcess Meh. You don't read your initial edit request or your later responses that way, and it is possible to read them as saying what you meant, but they do really look to everyone else that way. nor dod I state that the sources said McAvoy was in the film so don't put words where there are none for your own benefit Umm... what? If that was the case I would have said the sources are wrong. Again -- what? I'm sorry, but it doesn't help when I'm advising you to word your comments more carefully so they don't get repeatedly misunderstood, and the last two lines of your response are inscrutable. I suggest you put that into use before jumping to conclusions I'm not jumping to any conclusions. With the "sources contradict" thing, I was perhaps reading your comments in light of others' misinterpretations of them, but look at my last few sentences -- I'm not going to try to figure out for myself what you are talking about or jump to conclusions -- I'm just asking what you mean. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 15:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Oh my goodness, bolding one statement is not constantly shouting, you are absolutely ridiculous and I don't appreciate you attempting to intimidate me. I don't need nor want your "advise" on wording my comments "better" when my wording is not the issue. Next time you want to write a novel about your issues with my "wording", don't. Brocicle (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I didn't say you were constantly "shouting"; I said I had been constantly "shouting", and got warned over it and stopped doing it. Heck, in my case most of the time I wasn't even trying emphasize anything (as you were above) -- Template:tq wasn't as ubiquitous at the time and I was unaware of it. And it doesn't matter if you want my "advise" (sic -- please don't place your own misspellings/grammatical errors in quotes and misattribute them to me); you clearly do need it, as demonstrated by the fact that no one understood your edit request or any of your further comments. Please be more careful going forward. And no, I'm not interested in writing any novels at this time. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't see where you're getting that no one understood my edit request when Alex did. Don't you dare sit there and patronize me for a spelling mistake, that is incredibly petty and close to a personal attack. You never said "I got a sanction for constantly shouting", you should learn to be more careful with your wording so people don't misunderstand what you're trying to say. I didn't ask for your life story. I don't see why you have such a need to attack someone based on your misunderstanding. You've taken this way off topic because you apparently must comment on everything. If you have anything further to say to me, which I'm sure you will considering your behaviour shows you must have tue last word in everything, then take it to MY talk page where you should have taken it in the first place. So WP:DROPIT and WP:MOVEON — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brocicle (talk • contribs)

Okay, I'm seeing Alex write That is what the protected edit request is requesting, to remove the name and you responding Why remove the name?, so either you're wrong that Alex understood your initial edit request, or I'm still not understanding what you're talking about. And I didn't patronize you -- you put a misspelling in scare-quotes as though I had made a misspelling. Please refrain from putting indirect quotations in quotes as though they came from someone else, and be especially careful when doing so makes it look like you are making fun of other users for their poor spelling. I never said I got a sanction; I said I got a warning. To quote my exact words: when you get a formal warning, maybe even a sanction, for constantly [...] bolding text you really want the person to pay attention to [...] your view on that point will change. Mine did. I clearly stated that I was speaking from personal experience, and if you don't read what I write ... well, that's not my problem. You took this discussion off-topic yourself by making an edit request that no one could understand, and repeatedly making it worse by responding to their queries with equally ambiguous remarks. Good faith mistake or not, I think you should avoid that if you don't this to happen again. I'm not going to touch the general lack of civility in your rhetoric up to this point, as that would be off-topic for an article talk page. But yeah, it's clear that I'm not going to get through to you, so this will be my last reply here. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Did you even read the comments properly? AlexTheWhovian said "The article currently states "Charles Xavier / Professor X" under the "New Mutants (2018)", so the article does need updating, so the protected edit request is clearly necessary", in agreement, clearly he understood. I was not quoting you, for goodness sake stop jumping to conclusions. I don't care if you were speaking from personal experience, the way you wrote what you did came across as a threat, it's not my fault you chose your words poorly. Again, Alex understood so your "no one" remark is invalid. I took absolutely nothing off topic with my edit request as it is to do with the article and the content. You coming here and derailing the conversation has nothing to do with it. nobody cares about this but you. Seriously just get over it. Brocicle (talk) 03:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I say just delete the info about Xavier being in the film, unless we hear otherwise.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Professor X IS in the film, just won't be portrayed by McAvoy, which is why I asked for an edit request that ge won't be reprising the role. Brocicle (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

With conflicting reports, I think if we hold off until it's clarified that'd work best.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 17:29, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

There's no conflicting reports. This wasn't a discussion topic, it was an edit request for an admin to either add or not add the information presented considering the page is fully protected. Brocicle (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

There's no official information that Professor Charles Xavier would appear in the film. Those sources you copy and pasted are merely "scoops" which would be fine if Fox already confirmed them to be true which they haven't done yet. So remove the name like what Hotwiki and 50.232.205 suggested. This isn't a news site nor a rumor mill site.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 20:17, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, what are you talking about? His appearance is currently sourced within the article, so the article's content does indeed need updating, not deleting. Included in the source given in the article and direct from Kinberg: Right now, as the movie exists, Professor X would be a part of a New Mutants movie. (I'm also curious as to talking in the third person, but that's unrelated.) -- Alex^TW 20:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

It's legitimately sourced in the article already that Professor X is to appear in the movie. I have more RELIABLE sources if you need them. Fox doesn't need to confirm anything for the sources to be reliable. Seems as though no one is allowed to attempt to improve the article unless they have the okay from User:Hotwiki. Brocicle (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

I have zero problem with these "scoops" only if Fox (or the producers or the director) officially announced them. From the latest source that you added, it just contradicted the older sources. So in my opinion, remove the names (characters) that aren't officially announced. Hopefully you could start doing that once the article is free for everyone to edit. TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 01:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

But Professor X has been officially announced in the sources already in the article, James McAvoy just wont be reprising the role. That has nothing to do with removing anything. Brocicle (talk) 04:02, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

The producer already did officially announce the character. So, the article needs updating. What's your problem with this edit? -- Alex^TW 04:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

 Administrator note  Not done As this page is no longer protected, the edit request has been deactivated. Please ensure that edits reflect wikipedia policies and practices. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 11 May 2017

I was going to add the two actresses who have been cast for the New Mutants film. Anya Taylor-Joy, and Maisie Williams have both officially been cast in the film now. You can read about that here.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I am perched to see this get added in the New Mutants section.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 02:28, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Your reply at the previous discussion is required. -- Alex^TW 02:50, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

 Administrator note  Not done As this page is no longer protected, the edit request has been deactivated. Please ensure that edits reflect wikipedia policies and practices. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Logan Noir's Box Office Performance

Given the recent release of the black and white version of Logan, Logan Noir, its box office performance for the event will need to be calculated, if it hasn't been already. Impending IP (talk) 11:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Impending IPImpending IP (talk) 11:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

You're assuming its box office numbers aren't counted with Logan, right? Its the black and white version of the film and not an entirely new film or a re-release, Box Office Mojo hasn't even posted numbers (nor would they) for its box office performance. And please stop using "TBA", it's not advisable to use acronyms and crystal ball wording in Wikipedia articles.TheVeryHotWikipedian (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)