Good articleAvengers (Marvel Cinematic Universe) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 29, 2023Good article nomineeNot listed
January 2, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article


I think Okoye should be in the team roster

Hello, I need to argue something that is debatable: The thing is that I think Okoye should be on the team roster for this reasons: One, if you notice that in the theatrical poster of Avengers: Endgame only the surviving members of the Avengers with Thanos appear including Okoye. Two, some websites such as Marvel Cinematic Universe, Marvel Movies, and Heroes Wiki put Okoye as a member of the Avengers. so what do you guys think? After reading what I put, would you consider Okoye a member of the Avengers? I do not consider it 100%, so I put this message in this talk to see what you guys think. Pablo the Helper - To your service! 00:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to need to provide a reliable source that supports that, in addition to evidence from the films' plots. The MCU Wiki and other Fandom wikis are not considered reliable sources, and your argument about the Endgame poster is WP:OR (and kind of a stretch, if you ask me). InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add MODOK to the roster

Spoiler warning:

He was declared an avenger by Scott Lang, an active member, just before his death. If the armies and individuals in Endgame declared Avengers by Captain America are here, then MODOK should be as well. DoggedCorn (talk) 20:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This was clearly intended as a joke in the film and not taken seriously by the rest of the characters when said by MODOK. —El Millo (talk) 20:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's still worth a mention DoggedCorn (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't. I think it's trivial. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, trivial. —El Millo (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a trivial joke. Not worth mentioning. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:37, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it even worth mentioning him under "Other characters" like he currently is? -- ZooBlazertalk 07:00, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, we should remove it. —El Millo (talk) 07:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Individuals like Cassie Lang, Hank Pym, Darren Cross / M.O.D.O.K., and the citizens of the Quantum Realm fight the exiled Kang the Conqueror and his army of Quantumnauts alongside the Avenger Scott Lang / Ant-Man during the Battle of the Quantum Realm
Is he the only one that should be removed? And that battle name feels like the same situation we had with the final battle of Endgame. -- ZooBlazertalk 02:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we shouldn't mention MODOK in "Other characters" as it was a joke, noting the joke does not justify it. I don't think we should be mentioning the events of Quantumania on this article in that section or in the "Aftermatch" section specifically as it only pertains to one Avengers member (Scott), and not the team as a whole, and these characters allied with Scott, not the Avengers. The Little Guy info should remain, although we have to be careful of what is about the team or just individual members. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Quantumania stuff is fine in aftermath. That section has been mostly for what the team members have done following Endgame. I did remove Cross from the other characters and the aftermath section though. -- ZooBlazertalk 02:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that makes sense, as long as it does not diverge too much from this article's scope of the team. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding another point to this. We should not be conceiving our own terms for these fictional events, and considering that battle one is only used once here (where it shouldn't be mentioned) and was only added by a since blocked IP in May, I don't think there is much credence for it to remain. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At least it's not as ridiculous as what the fan wiki is calling it ... in all seriousness, I agree, no fan-coined terms on Wikipedia. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Harvest

Trying not to get too deep into Secret Invasion spoilers here, but is the Harvest worth mixing into the Aftermath section or elsewhere in the article? I feel like at the very least it should be mentioned somewhere, but if others feel differently, then I won't add anything. -- ZooBlazertalk 04:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I ended up just adding a little info for it. Feel free to move it somewhere else or remove it if you feel it shouldn't be in the article. -- ZooBlazertalk 16:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's worth a mention. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath section

The article failed the first GA attempt and one of the issues brought up was the aftermath section - At some points, the section doesn't discuss the team as a whole, but individual characters. This is especially apparent in "Aftermath" subsection, which details what happens to every single one of the Avengers post-disbandment

What should we do with the section? -- ZooBlazertalk 20:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This does go back to concerns I raised in the recent MODOK discussion about the Aftermath section's focus relying too much on individual characters who were on the team but not about the team itself. We have in-universe information at the individual character articles and film and TV articles for a reason. That section as it currently stands explains the events of post-Endgame material which does not specifically revolve around the Avengers team, and I think that should be an area of caution and avoidance. Summarizing the plot of a movie or series with an Avenger as the lead but not the team in it themselves seems irrelevant to this article. We do not need to state what each Avenger did after Endgame here, and should keep it down to information on the Avengers team themselves, such as the Harvest, Lang's book interpretation of the Endgame battle, the Council of Kang's reaction to the 616 Avengers, AvengersCon, and potentially some of the Avengers' retirements or departures from the team as a capper without divulging too far away from this article's subject, although I am less confident on the lattermost and think that we can summarize it with the team disbanding and leave specifics on the characters' fates and future to more relevant articles. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I cut out a lot of the unnecessary info, but didn't do much more than that yet. Also renamed the section. -- ZooBlazertalk 21:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Earth

The "Battle at the Avengers Compound" has been officially named "Battle of Earth" in the second last episode of Secret Invasion. Do we have to rename that section? Redjedi23 (talk) 16:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We had a discussion for this naming at Talk:Thor: Love and Thunder#Battle of Earth, where it was agreed we can use "Battle of Earth" as the official MCU name for properties where it is used (such as Ms. Marvel and Secret Invasion), and to use "the battle at the Avengers Compound" phrasing in plot summaries as a description for properties that don't use the "Battle of Earth" name. This article could use either one, dependent on what it is referring to in context. I would say the "Battle of Earth" term should be addressed within the context of the SI events and the Harvest. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the absolute worst case and in case there is a disambiguation needed, a footnote should suffice. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. BigLordFlashtalk 13:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Avengers (Marvel Cinematic Universe)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BigLordFlash (talk · contribs) 16:35, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm going to review this one. If you have any questions, just talk with me! BigLordFlashtalk 16:35, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. I left some comments below.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. It complies with everything.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. All good.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). I left some comments below.
2c. it contains no original research. All good.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. All good.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. it covers all main aspects.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. It's neutral.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. It's stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. All good.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. All media are relevant to the topic and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.

I'm going to leave some comments. It's very close to become a GA!

The Blip:

Reversing the Blip:

Reception:

Missing sources in "Other characters" and "What If...? (2021–present)" sections. BigLordFlashtalk 18:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added refs. I think I've addressed all of your concerns @BigLordFlash. Let me know if there's anything else. -- ZooBlazer 21:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ZooBlazer: About the Thor's journey in Infinity War, it still doesn't make sense because when u are reading the section, it feels like he was subdued by Thanos and then he appears out of nowhere using the Stormbreaker and with two Guardians of the Galaxy with no explanation. BigLordFlashtalk 22:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BigLordFlash Is it better now? -- ZooBlazer 23:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BigLordFlash I'm glad to see that this article has finally been reviewed! As the co-nominee, I did some CE for the article. I think Thor's journey in the IW section should be better clarified now, and the Avengers 2.5 comment currently shouldn't be WP:CITEKILL, as ZooBlazer took care of most, if not all, of the issues. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 04:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems all good to me! I'm going to pass this one. You really did a great job! Congratulations! :) BigLordFlashtalk 13:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Categories