Talk:Ouroboros (Loki)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ouroboros (Loki) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Television: Episode coverage / Marvel Cinematic Universe Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the Marvel Cinematic Universe task force (assessed as High-importance).

Comics: Marvel Bottom‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Bottom	This article has been rated as Bottom-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group.

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poster[edit]

For when it moves: [1] - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Favre1fan93 Do you think it's ready to move now? -- ZooBlazer^talk 03:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ZooBlazer: sorry, just seeing this. Probably. Remaining work can be dong post-move. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:44, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moon Knight audio[edit]

This was apparently in the clip of the scene released ahead of time, but wasn't in the Disney+ release. Should this even be mentioned? I can see it from a standpoint of content was changed (even though it was a 'prerelease' of it), but otherwise, it might just amount to a fun nod to Benson and Moorhead being a part of Moon Knight. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it was not included in the episode, I would just chalk this up to some fun trivia one can find on a wiki, but nothing worthwhile or suitable enough for inclusion here. Maybe if it actually makes it into another episode, but I don't think it's a gain or loss including it or not including it. Trailblazer101 (talk) 06:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Critical response[edit]

@Scope creep: why have you removed the critical response section from the article? This is a necessity for Wikipedia articles about film and television. You also reverted me without any explanation which is rude and makes the situation even more concerning. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on your talk page. Since when has it has been necessary to list reviews in an list format like this? scope_creep^Talk 20:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the formatting of the section is a problem on all of the the Loki season 2 episode articles, which is why there was the added template. That isn't a reason to just delete the whole section. Feel free to do a copyedit and fix it instead. ZooBlazer 20:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do article review as part of WP:NPP. I reviewed this article this morning and I didn't expect any problems with removing that non-standard section. Typical fan behaviour though. It is unacceptable for another editor to come and revert like that. That is a really poor choice on your part. Now, I'm going to start issuing warnings against the two of you if you keep doing this, for disruptive editing. That section is non-standard. If you decide that your going to gang up to swap and change to stymie the process, that is fine. That is your choice. I'm going to go through the process which I always do and you will end up an WP:ANI. scope_creep^Talk 20:50, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the section to series 2 of Loki on the first two episodes which is in the same non-standard format. Those sections can go back when they are correctly formated and embedded into the article in the usual manner. I'm sorry I had to be so brusque but it a mainspace article and there is certain standards there now that weren't there 10 years ago. Listing those review particularly when they're was no counter reivews makes it slightly n-pov and slightly promo. scope_creep^Talk 21:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting critical response sections from multiple articles and reverting multiple editors without good reason are both major problems. The sections do need to be cleaned up, that is why they have been tagged, but they should not be removed. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:11, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That section is non-standard That is simply untrue. MOS:TVRECEPTION applies to episode articles as well. Additionally, see any GA episode article, they all have reception sections. But, as has been noted, the formatting in which the info is presented is generally frowned upon, and the section has been tagged as such to indicate that. They are a work in progress. That doesn't mean the section should be deleted outright since the information is still relevant/useful, and is disruptive. Attempts to fix it should be made instead. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Starship.paint: as the main editor to add the reviews to all these episodes, as well as formatting them as such, you may wish to be informed of this discussion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:20, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: - please show a good example of a Reception section. I must say though, nuking a section for formatting is an overall net negative to readers. Just because the reviews are in a list format, does not mean that they are not useful to readers. starship .paint (RUN) 04:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check FA pages and GA pages, though some might be old promotions and out of sync with the newer MoS updates. Gonnym (talk) 11:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RECEPTION Indagate (talk) 13:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]