Template talk:Avengers

message: I added him to the template since he's primarily an Avengers villain, not a Fantastic Four villain as he was previously listed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by KangConquers (talk • contribs) 04:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immortus 

message: Should the Squadron Supreme be added under alternate continuities as they are their world's equivalents?~ZytheTalk to me! 22:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possible, but the are more copies of the Justice League of America (DC).  Spshu (talk) 19:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a thought... 

message: I think this needs to have the hide wrapper so it works better with other templates e.g. JLA/Avengers. (Emperor 10:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a long time in coming, but that's been fixed... - J Greb (talk) 15:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hide

message: Can it be done? This is what it would look like:
????--Lotsofinterviews (talk) 22:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a good idea.  I did some edits to your sample. Spshu (talk) 19:54, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres not some un-spoken rule or anything? Cool.--Lotsofinterviews (talk) 19:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Template Inside a Template?

message: Do you think he should count as an enemy of Avengers after all he has done in Dark Reign. Or would that be out of place? Captain Virtue (talk)
:Norman Osborn should definitely be listed as an enemy of the Avengers, but I tried to add the Avengers template to his profile, and it was deleted, as he has several other templates there already. Fortdj33 (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably, it is being remove as he is listed in Template:New Avengers as an enemy and isn't yet an enemy of the original organization. --Spshu (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Norman Osborn

message: What section of the template should we put the Avengers vs. X-Men link in, and why hasn't it been added yet?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.156.6.158 (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Storylines" - J Greb (talk) 22:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where should ''Avengers vs. X-Men'' be in the template?  

message: Links to The Super Hero Squad Show, the Marvel: Ultimate Alliance series, and the Marvel vs. Capcom series should be added in the "other media" section accordingly.
:Not really. Those are "It's Marvel Characters" products, not Avenger centric.
:- J Greb (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to ''The Super Hero Squad Show'', the ''Marvel: Ultimate Alliance'' series, and the ''Marvel vs. Capcom'' series  

message: The "Siege" storyline should be put in the "Storylines" section of the template.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.156.6.206 (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put "Siege" in "Storylines" section  

message: There seems to be a dispute regarding the inclusion of Avengers Confidential: Black Widow & Punisher. WP:EXISTING states "Navigation templates provide navigation between existing articles". The film does not have its own existing article but is redirected to a general article about Marvel Anime. As seen in the above discussions, Consensus is that links to individual sections of articles should not be placed in this template.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the content is there and has enough reliable sources. We could simply move this content [and Iron Man: Rise od Technovore too] to related Wikipedia entry. I don't know if it meets the criteria for WP:NOTE, but other released direct to video films of Marvel Animation have their own article. Raamin (talk) 19:32, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think the film merits its own article per WP:GNG, then that's one thing but we generally should not be including links to sub-topics.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also WP:MOVIE guideline and to my understanding, it doesn't forbid the creation of such an article. Raamin (talk) 19:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

text: I moved the content to the Avengers Confidential: Black Widow & Punisher entry, and added the title to the navbox; I hope there isn't a problem anymore. Raamin (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There isn't as far as the template is concerned, the notability of the new article should be discussed elsewhere if anyone cares to challenge it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably should not be linked here. The Avengers are just guest staring so as to justify the "Avengers Confidential" title to boost its profile for sales (As it is already more notable than IronMan:Technovore). As the core of the movie is around SHIELD, Black Widow as their agent and Punisher as their pawn paying his dues for the trouble he got into with SHIELD. Spshu (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Spshu that the title and the guest-starring of the Avengers are to increase the profile and sales of the movie, but they are in the movie and in the title. By Wikipedia standards that means it should be included. If we start judging whether every article is truly part of a larger category despite having the name included it will open a Pandora's box of debate on all adaptations of one media into another, because not all fans like all adaptations and some will argue it shouldn't be included because it isn't a true adaptation. Spidey104 14:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avengers Confidential: Black Widow & Punisher 

message: add hawkeye and quicksilver and scarlet witch and hercules to initial members
199.79.170.163 (talk) 04:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. —  (t • e • c) 14:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2014 

message: The addition of Disney Infinity: 2.0 Edition to the video games section.
77.97.110.60 (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Dom497 (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2014 

message: Who should be added to the Avengers enemies page
Special:Contributions/Rymax23 (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding enemies

message: Iron max 2 (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Avengers Enemies

message: Request edit of the Avengers navbox, Captain America is not a founding or initial member, he was recruited in #4.
173.56.226.25 (talk) 21:31, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template.  List_of_Avengers_members says he was given founding member status.  RudolfRed (talk) 21:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2016 

message: It seems weird to have the Super-Adaptoid and Norman Osborn on the Avengers Template, but not Scarlet Witch or Hawkeye or Vision. And criterion for inclusion wouldn't have to be particularly subjective - you could just look at who's been in the most Avengers comics other than the 5 originals + Cap. john k (talk) 03:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, they should be removed.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 08:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't necessarily disagree with that (though I think it would make sense to list at least Kang, Ultron, and the Masters of Evil on the Template, and maybe a few other prominent antagonists), but I actually do think that the most prominent Avengers should be on the Template. How about the ones Marvel itself lists as "Core Avengers" - Black Panther, Black Widow, Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers), Falcon, Hawkeye, Luke Cage, Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Spider-Woman (Jessica Drew), Vision, and Wonder Man? john k (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  members vs. villains 

message: Steve Rogers was added to the group in the march 1964. That's basically six month after the debut of the team.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.116.84 (talk) 17:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: He was retroactively given "founding member" status as stated in the main article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captain America is not an initial member