# Talk:Captain America: The Winter Soldier

@GalaxyFighter55: When your WP:BOLD edit is reverted more than once, and by more than one editor, please do not revert back and forth. As you must know, this is edit-warring and against the recommendations of WP:BRD. Secondly, you have not provided a reason for removing {{nowrap}}. There’s no rule in the infobox guidelines that says this must be done to subtitles. – No one said there was, nor is that a valid reason to remove something. If the infobox documentation or some other PAG had said that {{nowrap}} should not be used, then that would be a legitimate reason. As I explained in my edit summary, {{nowrap}} is currently being used to avoid an unnatural line break, so unless this causes accessibility or other issues, there is no reason to remove it. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Was typing this as Adamstom reverted; they basically summarized what I wrote above. Pinging @Rhain, who added the template and may be interested in this discussion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
To be fair, you didn’t provide any valid reasoning to keep it the first time around. But for the sake of WP:EW, I will refrain from further reverting until we reach a consensus on whether this is ok to have or not. And in case it wasn’t clear from the multiple second user’s edit description that reverted in question, they meant to remove the entire name parameter but accidentally went back to the nowrap revision.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
My revert addressed your then latest change of having the name parameter exactly same as article title, you should discuss if unclear not make your edit for third time. I also disagree with you removing it as there is a natural break between title and subtitle. Indagate (talk) 11:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Then what qualifies as an unnatural break? Because I've previously attempted the exact same thing in the past and got that reverted. So you're telling me we can just flip-flop here and have no real protocol besides "because I feel like it"? Make it make sense!!--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 07:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Natural break being the title and subtitle being a similar length. Can you give an example of where you've been reverted before please? Indagate (talk) 08:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
You believe  looks better than ? InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
How it looks is irrelevant to this conversation.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
How it looks is literally the reason for doing it. —El Millo (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Then if I ever get reverted for doing the same exact edits again as I had in the past but was reverted otherwise I will come back here, ping you guys and the user I'm having the conflict, and you guys can deal with it.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 06:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, you still need consensus and discussion if you're reverted. It's not like "it looks better" is backed up by policy or anything, but if it looking better doesn't violate any policy or ignores any guideline, then it can be done, as long as you're not doing it against consensus. —El Millo (talk) 15:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Then it's clear this one needs a policy rule if its gonna be that inconsistent per-article.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 07:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
This is not the sort of thing that Wikipedia makes rules about. Potentially there could be a suggestion for best practice added to the Infobox template instructions and/or to the film manual of style if the wider community felt that was warranted. But for now, the issue should be determined through local consensus at each of the relevant articles. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Avengers 1.5 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 5 § Avengers 1.5 until a consensus is reached.  -- ZooBlazer 17:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Why does adamstom97 disagree with my Plot edits? 63.229.77.121 (talk) 00:00, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

You made major, unexplained changes to the plot summary that were not all clear improvements. I understand why you changed the references to Sharon Carter, but considering there is long-held consensus for the current wording I think it should be discussed before changing it. Capitalising Hydra is incorrect, that is a stylistic decision for the comics which we should not follow. - adamstom97 (talk) 11:23, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I made my changes because readers who didn't see the film and don't mind spoilers will read it without context. Why does Cap recognize Bucky only when Sitwell dies? How did Hydra convince the world? Why does Bucky save Cap if they were enemies earlier? How does Cap turn up unconscious?
Addtionally, your version has errors (e.g. Cap and Widow realize who Pierce is at Sam's home and not right after the missile attack, Bucky destroys only Sam's wings and not his whole suit, and Cap does answer Pierce, just one thing about Fury in the apartment).
75.167.199.61 (talk) 75.167.199.61 (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I think you are being unnecessarily pedantic, they realize who Pierce is because of the missile and Rogers refuses to answer the questions that Pierce wants answered. I don't believe those questions you listed are really things that the plot summary needs to answer. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:37, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
They need to be answered, or else the readers from my hypothetical will be asking those questions.
As for Pierce, putting the part about the realization at the same sentence as the missile will be read to mean that they don't realize it at the house,
75.167.199.61 (talk) 75.167.199.61 (talk) 03:38, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
The plot summary is not a scene-by-scene breakdown, we can put information in the most logical position. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:35, 10 August 2025 (UTC)