Talk:She-Hulk: Attorney at Law/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Maslany casting confirmed by the other trades

If it matters to add this into the casting section, Variety, THR, EW, and TheWrap all independently state they confirmed Maslany was cast/being considered, while also h/t to Deadline. Didn't know if we want to add wording like "In September 2020, Deadline Hollywood reported that Tatiana Maslany was cast in the lead role of Walters, which was subsequently confirmed by Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Entertainment Weekly, and TheWrap." - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Generally I feel like the trades have some similar, but different sources, unless it was the same individual(s) in each of these cases... - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:22, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
I think we can just add more sources and say multiple trades or something like that. I feel like listing out all the sources like that puts too much weight on them. I am also not convinced that she isn't cast. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:23, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Per the discussion happening at the Phase Four talk, TriiipleThreat added posts in which Gao and Coiro congratulated her, so yeah, it's looking like she's being coy. Regardless, the other trade sources are here if we feel we need them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

THR has again confirmed Maslany. Should we add her back in with the original source plus this one? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:41, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I view this to be the best course of action at the present moment. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and do that, and add a bit in the casting section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:32, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
That works for me. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Filming looks to have already begun

According to the newest Instagram post from its co-director Kat Coiro, She-Hulk looks to have begun filming: https://www.instagram.com/p/CMxSCLPpxX-/?igshid=59woy8px3rjx.

And, it's further implied filming has begun by Coiro commenting under the post "safety on set."

Considering this may mean filming for She-Hulk has begun, can we add this into the series' wiki page and make it a wiki page and no longer the draft of a wiki page? Please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarvelDisney20 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

No, verification must be explicit.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Agreed. That's hardly any sort of confirmation that filming has actually started. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

She-Hulk wraps filming, according to the show's stunt coordinator

According to the show's stunt coordinator named Monique Ganderton, She-Hulk has wrapped filming: https://www.murphysmultiverse.com/she-hulks-stunt-coordinator-confirms-production-wrapped-on-disney-series/.

I hope we can add this into the show's Wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarvelDisney20 (talk • contribs)

Murphy's Multiverse is an unreliable source, the Instagram post is ambiguous, and the Instagram account isn't verified. —El Millo (talk) 23:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Fyi, ComicBook.com also picked up on this, though I still think it's dubious. IronManCap (talk) 02:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Yup, I'd wait until either the top-tier reliable sources report on it, or the original source is something else, from a verified account and unambiguous. —El Millo (talk) 02:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

logo change?

the official logo's been revealed. should we change the current one in that case? Visokor (talk) 06:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

It is. You may need to WP:PURGE your browser's cache. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:43, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

August premiere date?

https://www.chippu.com.br/noticias/she-hulk-sera-comedia-com-personagem-advogando-para-viloes-como-abominacao--estreia-sera-e-em-agosto-exclusivo According to this Brazilian site, the series will premiere in August. Is this reliable enough to use in the article? -TrixieCat123 (User talk:TrixieCat123) 22:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

@TrixieCat123 That is not a good source. Reading the article seems that the writer guesses the plot without seeing it yet. Centcom08 (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

August 17 Release Leak

Just a heads up to let editors know that a Disney UK page showcasing some of Marvel's content lists She-Hulk as "streaming 17 August". As Forbes points out, this article doesn't include all of Marvel's Disney+ series like Moon Knight or Echo, but it should be kept in mind for future reference, in case this turns out to be true and officially announced. I don't think we should add this as official at this time, given some of these sites being incorrect. Trailblazer101 (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the foreign websites can be inaccurate, and I think this section has since been removed from the page, but we can probably expect to hear official confirmation of this soon. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:45, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Premise section issue

Most of the premise section is closely paraphrased from this Hollinwood Reporter article KaraLG84 (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

The source is exactly the one used for that section. Jolly1253 (talk) 08:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Archiving

@YoungForever and Favre1fan93: Per WP:TALKCOND, discussions should only be archived when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has numerous resolved or stale discussions. This page meets neither of those criteria... InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Three discussions may be a few, but it's not numerous in the sense of excessive CreecregofLife (talk) 03:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I also agreed, but at this point, the "genie was out of the bottle" so to speak. I don't know why YoungForever started archiving in the first place, but I don't think we should be doing that moving forward. I set up the autoarchiving so that will happen in time. I set it to 100 days old, but we can make that much higher if needed until the size gets up there. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I was archiving stale discussions that were more than 6 months old. I didn't know it was a big problem given they were stale discussions. — YoungForever(talk) 04:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This page and /Archive 1 combined are still far from 75 KB, and I wouldn't call three discussions "numerous". But like Favre said: what's happened, happened (kudos to you if you understood that reference), so just take this as advice not to do that again. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Look, I understand TALKCOND and what Favre1fan93 is saying. No need to repeat what he said. — YoungForever(talk) 05:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Emil Blonsky

Why don't you do an article on Emil Blonsky from the MCU? 178.216.161.103 (talk) 17:28, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

There's some content about Blonsky in The Incredible Hulk (film) and here. You can start a draft at Draft:Emil Blonsky (Marvel Cinematic Universe). – SirDot (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Please don't though. The character hasn't had enough significant appearances to warrant an article on him, and there's no indication he'll ever be the protagonist of a project. —El Millo (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
He will be one of the main characters in the She-Hulk series. Viper688 (talk) 18:09, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
That's still not enough to warrant an individual article. This would only mean the character has had two major appearances in the whole MCU. —El Millo (talk) 18:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Why then is there an article about Kate Bishop? That's her one major appearance in the MCU. Blonsky has two major appearances. 178.216.161.103 (talk) 18:45, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I was not aware of this article's existence, but I think she's being considered a co-lead of the Hawkeye show, which per WP:MCUCHARACTERS would qualify her for an individual article. —El Millo (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
While she only has the one series so far, it's probably more screentime and plot relevance than a good amount get in a single movieCreecregofLife (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

After the TV series comes out, I'll create an article about Blonsky. 94.253.39.3 (talk) 19:15, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

You'll create a draft, which per WP:MCUCHARACTERS won't be an article until the character has four significant appearances or one appearance as a titular character. —El Millo (talk) 19:19, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
It seems like editors are just going to keep creating these character drafts unlikely to become articles in the forseeable future. Looking at WP:MCU/Drafts, this is getting rather ridiculous. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
I agree on the ridiculousness of the draft pileup. I would almost say the drafters want their work and devotion validated while not understanding the standard CreecregofLife (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Not to undermine the work of some editors, but most character drafts these days are just cut-and-paste jobs from other articles plus a bunch of plot summaries. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:33, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
I've created one draft (Talos) and revived one (Agatha) as both will be eligible for the mainspace after Secret Invasion and House of Harkness respectively if I understand the criteria correctly. But I do agree that overall the majority of the current drafts won't be eligible for pages any time soon, if ever. -- Zoo (talk) 01:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
But if Blonsky is going to have one of the main roles in the TV series, why not make a separate article about him? 94.253.39.3 (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
He's not the lead character of the series even if he has a main role. He had a main role in the Hulk film as well, but he'll need two more appearances as a non-minor character, or one as the lead or co-lead, whether in a film or series, before he is eligible for a mainspace article. -- Zoo (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Main role != lead role. Blonsky would not be eligible for his own article even after She-Hulk comes out. By the way, I don't think we can say for sure Talos has a co-lead role in Secret Invasion either. Thus far there has been no evidence he will have equal screentime/importance with SLJ. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
I think we'll only be able to tell about Talos after the whole series is released, based on how the secondary sources refer to his role. —El Millo (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
And I doubt Blonsky is Walters's only case CreecregofLife (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Will it be possible to write an article about Walters after the series? 94.253.39.3 (talk) 05:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes and a draft has already been started - Draft:Jennifer Walters (Marvel Cinematic Universe) -- Zoo (talk) 05:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Production Issues Report

Some of the more unreliable insider sites (and most recently Jeff Sneider on his podcast The Ankler) have been discussing how this series is having issues behind the scenes, and Matthew Belloni, a former editor at The Hollywood Reporter who co-founded Puck News, detailed his independent report on this in an article of Disney earnings call he was on. I used to be subscribed for Puck and restarted a 7-day free trial to look through the report myself, as only sites like ComicBookMovie have reported on this. I did manage to get an archive of the full report that we can use, and will quote the material here: So Moon Knight generated about half the initial viewership as Hawkeye, and many fans seem to dislike it intensely. I recently discussed the question of whether Marvel has a creative problem on my podcast, The Town, but even from a purely business perspective, Marvel needs to figure out how to generate Avenger-level interest from non-Avenger properties. The upcoming She-Hulk is supposedly a mess, I’ve heard (even with Mark Ruffalo in a small role), and Ms. Marvel is another big test for fans. Nobody’s saying Marvel’s TV output is in trouble, but it’s something to keep an eye on. On the other hand, Lucasfilm’s Star Wars movies might be dormant, but Obi-Wan Kenobi, with Ewan McGregor, will almost certainly be huge this May and June. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

It's really hard to know what to believe unless one of the trades or Marvel themselves says something similar. And if the August date turns out to be true, then it doesn't seem like the production issues (if there are any) are that bad. -- Zoo (talk) 04:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Considering Belloni's a credible journalist and not just some reporter stating things for a third-party source, I don't believe we would need another source (or especially Marvel) to confirm this, as this is a reliable source whereas the other sites reporting on this are less than that, and Marvel doesn't always confirm production details, which is why these industry sources are helpful, especially when they are credible. A third-party source of higher credibility discussing Belloni's report would be preferred, but not necessary given the credibility of the report and Belloni. The potential August release is separate from this report, and that date still could have been delayed from something earlier due to Ms. Marvel and the production issues, but any rationale to say that the leaked release would cast doubt on this would be a stretch and WP:OR. Trailblazer101 (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
I think we could site material from Belloni, but in this instance, what is "a mess"? Is it the story? The visual effects? It's kind of a broad statement, and I don't see how we could fit it in to the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
From what I can gather in Belloni's report, he seems to be discussing the reported "creative problems" that he talked about on his podcast, which we could fit in but very briefly, or not at all. It really would depend on if we had more information. I do think Ruffalo's "small role" bit is relevant, but for now, the reported "mess" may be something we should keep in mind and see if anything else comes from that. Belloni's statements do seem relevant to the Phase Four article's commentary on the phase's direction with the popularity of newer non-Avengers brands and their TV output, but I'm not sure how much we can include here without reaching. Potential mock-up wording for them could be, as follows: In development, we can state Matthew Belloni, a former editor for The Hollywood Reporter, said in May 2022 that, in regards to reported creative problems, She-Hulk was "supposedly a mess". while in casting, In May 2022, Ruffalo was reported to have a "small role" in the series. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
We'd still need something reputable to back up the "creative mess" to use Belloni. However, I think we can add the "small role" bit just and Feige officially confirmed it the next month, along with Ruffalo's involvement and the casting of Tim Roth in the series. So we can make it and Feige officially confirmed it the next month, along with Ruffalo's involvement and the casting of Tim Roth in the series.<ref name="DisneyInvestorDay" /> Ruffalo was reported to have a "small role" in the series. If there's any site talking about what Belloni said on "The Town" for the creative problem, that could get added to the Phase Four article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
MovieWeb has an article discussing Belloni's report, as well as background info from The Ankler's Jeff Sneider about the prior reports of producion issues. It doesn't expand on what was discussed in Belloni's podcast, however. Trailblazer101 (talk) 13:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
We could use that for the Ruffalo bit, but yeah, it's still just generalizations about what ever issues there may or may not be. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
And I see it has been. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

The fact that Matthew Belloni uses a misconstrued argument out of context to justify claiming that Moon Knight was heavily disliked... makes it difficult to fully trust his credibility for "I've heard" rumors that aren't supported by other independent sources. He uses Hawkeye vs Moon Knight minutes watched in the first week, but intentionally leaves out the fact that Hawkeye had 2 episodes while Moon Knight had one episode and therefore it's natural for Hawkeye to be about two times Moon Knight total minutes. Hawkeye's per episode viewing is just around 7M which is about the same level as other MCU shows besides Loki. So, by painting it as big failure, it makes his argument of MCU creative problems questionable as potential bias. I'd wait for independent sources. Every production has its issues so without specifics, this isn't anything solid to go by. — Starforce13 16:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree, there's definitely a skew CreecregofLife (talk) 16:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Since Belloni's podcast episode for The Town discussing Marvel's potential problems had The Ringer's Sean Fennessey as a guest where they went back-and-forth discussing the topic, there is an article from The Ringer by both of them with excerpts of their convo. I am currently working on reading through this article and pairing that info with any relevant bits from Belloni's Puck report to add to the commentary on the Phase Four article. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I have now added that information of their commentary to the Phase Four article, with a little bit from Belloni's report. Feel free to c/e as needed, as I'm not set on the wording and a few things can probably get cut down and reworded, but it's there now. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:26, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I meant to say this earlier, but Belloni's podcast (and the article) don't mention anything specific about this series, so whatever reported production issues there are are not known publicly, meaning we really have nothing notable and concrete to go off of. If anything comes from this in the future, we can add info on it, but if not, that will be just fine. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:45, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Just a heads up, but on the series' fact sheet (via DMED), the cast list is presented as "Tatiana Maslany, Jameela Jamil, Josh Segarra, Ginger Gonzaga, Jon Bass with Renée Elise Goldsberry and Tim Roth", while it lists "Special Guest Appearances by: Mark Ruffalo, Benedict Wong". This appears to further Belloni's report. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Still nothing concrete about the actual issues though CreecregofLife (talk) 02:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm well aware of that. We may not get word of the exact extent of the production issues, which is fine. Trailblazer101 (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Ruffalo and Wong

Based on this edit, it appears that Ruffalo and Wong will appear in a cameo appearance? 2A00:1FA0:4496:888C:0:69:C654:2901 (talk) 14:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes. CreecregofLife (talk) 14:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Special guest appearance and a cameo aren't the same. —El Millo (talk) 14:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
All it means is they aren't part of the main cast, but it doesn't determine how big or small their roles are in the series. -- Zoo (talk) 14:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
What about Tim Roth? 178.216.161.120 (talk) 14:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Roth is listed as part of the main cast on the Disney fact sheet. — SirDot (talk) 16:03, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
So it turns out that Abomination will show up more often than the Hulk? 178.216.161.120 (talk) 16:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
"Special Guest Appearance" could mean Ruffalo as Hulk for an episode or two, best to see when the show premieres. — SirDot (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Right right, I should’ve been more straightforward than running on assumed conflation CreecregofLife (talk) 18:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
"Special Guest Appearance" still means they'll appear in the opening credits and will be considered a bulleted cast member. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Ah true. The John Constantine Legends of Tomorrow way CreecregofLife (talk) 04:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Linda Cardellini was credited as such on Hawkeye and we made no special distinction there. Same will apply here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely the right move CreecregofLife (talk) 17:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Better Call Saul

Just wondering if we have a source for Bob Odenkirk appearing as Saul Goodman? Or if perhaps someone’s having a laugh Jekrox (talk) 02:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

The editor has been warned about vandalising the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
It would be best to revert anything out of the ordinary on sight without discussion. If it looks like vandalism it usually is. 2A00:23C8:5228:1601:64A2:62C:6721:B1A (talk) 17:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it doesn’t make any sense when I remove the actor’s name and I saw it and someone removed it causing an edit war. PhampH102 (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Matador, Man-Bull, and the Magician

Can we use this source yet? BOZ (talk) 21:05, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, the article clearly states "appears to be", so we will need a better source. BOZ (talk) 21:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Yeah yesterday there was a ComicBook article saying those were completely different characters. So It's all unclear at the moment and just speculation based on costumes/appearances. The only consensus I've seen is for the Wrecking Crew. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:31, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, cool, we can wait for some more official confirmation. BOZ (talk) 04:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Holloway

Finally found the actor who plays Holden Holloway (the "H" in GLK&H): Steve Coulter. If we don't find a reliable source that says he's playing Holloway, we can just wait till the Episode 1 credits. — SirDot (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Best I could find is this from Looper. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Why Smart Hulk?

Unless he is called like that in the series, I don't think he should be named Smart Hulk in the cast section for now (even if it's coming from the Marvel.com article about the trailer) AxGRvS (talk) 18:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

You just answered your own question. It’s a reliable source calling him such CreecregofLife (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
My point is he has never been called like that so unless he is called "Smart Hulk" in the series, we should simply have it as Hulk. AxGRvS (talk) 20:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
But he has been called that. CreecregofLife (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Where? In which movie or series? That's what I am talking about, this is like when Wanda Maximoff was called Scarlet Witch in promotional material but never in media until WandaVision, or more recently, the character of Layla in Moon Knight being called Scarlet Scarab by a Marvel.com article when she is never called like that in the actual show. So, my opinion is that unless Hulk ends up being called Smart Hulk in the series, we shouldn't add that alias in the cast section. AxGRvS (talk) 23:06, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
You’re discarding non-Film/TV sources despite their validity and then asking specifically for movies and series? CreecregofLife (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Look, it's not too hard to understand my point. So far, the character has never been called "Smart Hulk" in any film or series, just like Wanda Maximoff who was never called Scarlet Witch until WandaVision or Layla who was never called Scarlet Scarab. And yeah, there were Marvel articles and promotional material calling these two by those alias, but they were never actually called like that in the movies or shows (in the case of Wanda, I'm obviously talking about media prior to WandaVision). Just like Hulk. So, again, why don't wait until the series to see if they actually call him "Smart Hulk" and not just follow one article? AxGRvS (talk) 04:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Marvel.com usually mirrors the end credits of series, so this is fine. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Not really, look at the example of Layla and her Scarlet Scarab alias AxGRvS (talk) 21:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
He said "usually". A single contradicting example doesn't compromise the statement CreecregofLife (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
We have a second source for Smart Hulk, this time from D23 - Richiekim (talk) 00:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
And now the series itself used it so we have the ultimate source now. -- Zoo (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Post credit scene

Add the post credit scene from episode 1 103.82.82.110 (talk) 14:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Joke post-credits scene. Doesn't need to be added. — SirDot (talk) 15:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Although in this case there is some info about it at "A Normal Amount of Rage". -- Zoo (talk) 03:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

About the review bombing of the first episode

Apparently, 82.69.124.112 keeps on removing the information on the "Reception" section about the review bombing, claiming it is "fake news" despite a source attached to the said information. This IP editor has been warned for disruptive editing already, but I would like to know why he/she keeps on saying that the information is false. Centcom08 (talk) 10:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Putting aside the childish "fake news" comments, such people can sometimes be right but for entirely the wrong reasons. I too have concerns about encyclopedia articles including unreliable user voted web polls, please see WP:UGC if you are not already familiar with the guidelines (and maybe also WP:RS). There is reference to a WP:SECONDARY source, but I'd prefer if there were more and better sources than the only marginally reliable Screenrant. Also it appears Screenrant is merely rehashing an article from TheDirect.com [1] and at the time that article was written they were talking about only 261 audience reviews on IMDB. I do not think this reporting is reliable and it is WP:UNDUE for this encyclopedia article to emphasize claims that there was so called "review bombing" at at time when there were so few reviews (and in any case there were nearly as many positive 10 out 10 reviews as there were negative 1 out of 10 reviews). This encyclopedia article should not include such misleading information and should wait until more reliable sources of WP:TVRECEPTION information such as Nielsen Ratings are available. -- 109.78.206.101 (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
In this case, the review bomb was referred to have occurred before the premiere of the first episode, hence the limited amount of reviews mentioned at the writing of the article. I have found other sources that supports this, although I'm not sure if it's better than Screen Rant: [2] from Comicbook.com and [3] from CBR.com. Jolly1253 (talk) 01:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
hence the limited amount of reviews mentioned the whole thing is marginal and WP:UNDUE attention in this encyclopedia. Even if only 261 reviews can actually be characterized as "review bombing" (large number of people? really?) the number of positive reviews were nearly the same as the negative reviews. Again it is highly improbable that any of these people had actually seen the show.
CBR.com is also a mediocre source, and they clearly state "As reported by Screen Rant"[4] (and as I said earlier Screenrant was only rehashing reporting from TheDirect.com). [P.S. I didn't realise this before but CBR.com is owned by the same people who own Screenrant since 2016.] Comicbook.com is an adequate source, they are "owned by CBS Interactive, a division of Paramount" and generally seem to take responsibility for their own reporting and are not just rehashing articles from elsewhere.[5] Nonetheless the article explains "these types of measurements in the quality of a show is highly specious when the show hasn't even been released yet" so again I would still say this isn't something that belongs in an encyclopedia. IMDB scores are garbage to begin with and editors of this encyclopedia should not fall for this, do not feed the trolls, or otherwise highlight this small group of people trying to get attention. -- 109.76.197.234 (talk) 14:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Just to clarify for anyone else reading this, the section heading is inaccurate, the alleged review bombing described by the article was not targeted at the first episode, the referenced articles were pointing to the IMDB page for the whole series[6] not IMDB the page for first episode[7]. If a reliable mainstream source (Deadline, Variety, THR, or even any mainstream newspaper) actually reports on audience response I would no longer consider it WP:UNDUE to mention it, but as real reviews and viewership numbers come in I expect this fuss to become increasingly irrelevant. IMDB user votes simply do not deserve attention in the first place. I wish editors of this encyclopedia could be more serious and stop overreacting and giving WP:UNDUE attention to online attention seekers and insignificant Twitter storms. -- 109.76.197.234 (talk) 16:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

GLK&H reference in Agent Carter

Is it notable for this article to state the GLK&H firm (only as GKH) was previously referenced in the Agent Carter TV show?

Here's a tweet from Dan Slott talking about that: https://twitter.com/DanSlott/status/1561188138747400193?cxt=HHwWgsC82eaVuqorAAAA 186.111.137.167 (talk) 16:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Not particularly, its just niche trivia and does not provide readers with any more information on the tv series, background or any context for the characters. Terasail[✉️] 18:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
We don't know if there will be any sort of relationship between that mention and what She-Hulk is doing. Frankly, Agent Carter's use back then was just probably an Easter egg. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I have made mentions of this at Bridge and Tunnel (where the mention was made) and the Agent Carter season 1 article, where this is appropriate. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Steve Coulter portraying Holliway

Can somebody help me clarify the name/correct Wikipedia status for the actor playing Holden Holliway? On the page for A Normal Amount of Rage, the actors name was linked to Steve Coulter, who is involved in Nascar instead of Hollywood. Then, there is a page for Stephen Coulter, who is apparently an English journalist. And then, there is Steven Coulter, an American actor with a really sketchy Wikipedia page. I think She-Hulk's Steve Coulter is an entirely different individual who does not yet have a Wikipedia article, but this is a lot of confusion. I think we should start a disambiguation page along with more specific page titles. Anybody want to weight in? TNstingray (talk) 15:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Neither of these current links are the actor in this series, I can say that for certain. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

question

If Titania is a social media influencer, surely she has an official Twitter account, right? I did find it, but no-one's mentioned it anywhere on this article... Visokor (talk) 21:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

It is because her Twitter account is not of much importance on this page. We strictly cover the essential parts only. Not to forget we mostly go by sources Seaweed Brain1993 (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
It's mentioned in the "Marketing" section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Template:She-Hulk: Attorney at Law

There is currently a discussion at the template talk page regarding if The Incredible Hulk should be included in the template. Giving a notice here as there are likely more watchers of this article than the template. Discussion can be found here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hostile architecture bench in Marketing

At the launch event for She-Hulk: Attorney at Law, a bench with the She-Hulk marketing hotline was displayed, which drew criticism for normalizing hostile architecture, since the bench featured a middle bar which discourages people from laying down. There was considerable backlash to this marketing decision, but it's not mentioned anywhere in the Marketing section. I think there should be. I don't know how reliable of a source Newsweek is, but this is the first result I could find through cursory searches. If someone else can find more sources and add it to Marketing, I think it's a valuable addition, even just as one paragraph.

Link: https://www.newsweek.com/marvels-she-hulk-bench-launch-bashed-anti-homeless-architecture-1734229?amp=1

RobotGoggles (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Unless there are more sources covering this it feels like it isn't noteworthy and mentioning it would be WP:UNDUE. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
I'll collect as many sources I can find that mention the controversy.
NYPost is almost certainly a bad source but here's their article.
https://nypost.com/2022/08/17/marvels-she-hulk-bench-slammed-over-anti-homeless-architecture/amp/
The Architect's Newspaper is a source I've never heard of before now, but perhaps it's a good source. Here's their article.
https://www.archpaper.com/2022/08/daily-digest-she-hulk-bench-anti-homeless-architecture-fire-catskills-resort-more/?amp=1
This is an article from The Mary Sue, which I've never heard of before but apparently it's a feminist pop culture website, and not, as I had assumed, the opposite of a feminist pop culture website.
https://www.themarysue.com/she-hulk-controversial-hostile-architecture/
I don't know if these sources are the most notable, and perhaps there's better sources from Twitter (from journalists who might have chosen to tweet about it) but this is what I could find in a late-night cursory search. RobotGoggles (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Episode draft links and potential posters

Here are the links to the drafts for each episode, as well as potential posters for the infobox when they move.

  1. A Normal Amount of Rage - moved to mainspace; poster
  2. Superhuman Law - moved to mainspace

- Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Here's other potential poster options:
  1. Poster #1
  2. Poster #2
-- Zoo (talk) 04:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Yeah I realized that they've been releasing more since I put that first one. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
It's looking like those 3 are our options -- Zoo (talk) 21:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Which poster do you think is best to use @Favre1fan93? -- Zoo (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
At the moment it looks like they aren't really lining up with the episodes. The one Favre first suggested seems to reference the "balance" line from the first episode in the tweet, but there isn't really anything in the image to directly link to the episode. Your option #1 seems better in that regard since it appears to have elements from the beach location in the first episode. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:55, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Have we gotten any more posters since these? I think Zoo's option 2 would be good for episode 2, as the outfit Jen has on seems to match what she wore going to GLK&H on her first day. And I honestly don't have any opinion on the other two, only that they were created. I don't feel like either really equate to what happened in the first episode without us trying to pull our own opinions into it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I added the "magazine" poster that was released yesterday for episode 2 as it is pretty episode specific I think. Other than that I don't think any posters have been released except the three above. -- Zoo (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I feel like Disney/Marvel might be releasing a bunch of posters randomly, and once they are finished showing posters, we can sort them out from there (as per WP:NORUSH). However, with that being said, I think this poster [8] is the best choice for the first episode Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Episode-specific production info

  • Episode 9: Roth improvised lines about the recasting of the character when meeting Banner ("RothEW" source from here)

- Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@SirDot @Favre1fan93 @ZooBlazer Just wanted to let you know I have edited the draft for episode 4 and have already integrated info about Walters' date and one-night stand and also Ramos' sexuality in the article. I have not yet talked about Wong's relationship with Madisynn. The only major task left is adding reception. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
@Dcdiehardfan: Thanks, I plan to work on the episode 4 draft soon myself, perhaps tomorrow. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
@Favre1fan93 I have already added reception info into the draft for Ep 4, and I think it should be ready for mainspace. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Sounds excellent. With contributions being made tomorrow, I expect it should be ready for mainspace very soon. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Megan Thee Stallion as a bulleted cast member

I know past consensus for the Disney+ series is to follow the actors included in the main on end billing, but for this situation, unless she appears again (which is not known at this time but is likely not), this is just a "major" cameo and I don't think we should be including her in the bulleted cast list. I was going to boldly move it but decided to start a discussion on it first. Thoughts? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93 I support removing her from the bullet list. Generally speaking in my opinion, any actors who appear as themselves don't need to be bulleted. Centcom08 (talk) 15:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
I've removed and put her back in the prose. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
I support removal for all obvious, aforementioned reasons ChicagoWikiEditor (talk) 06:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

That seems a bit subjective, no? The consensus has been that anyone included in the credit sequence is considered a main cast member, even if they are labeled as “Special Guest Star”. Whether we like the decision or not, that’s how Marvel handled Megan. And she’s not even a “Special Guest Star”, she’s right there after Ginger Gonzaga. Even if there’s some precedent for not bulleting her in the cast list, there should be some acknowledgment in the prose of how she was credited and she should probably be included in the infobox and description. NickH (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Taking into account the episode's end credits (which can be seen in the breakdown section above), she is in the part of the list with the unnamed and extremely minor named characters, not up with the other "starring" actors. Additionally, since she was appearing as herself, not as a character, it's just an extremely glorified cameo. One wouldn't call her a "starring cast member" of this series in any shape or form. Hence, she shouldn't be featured among the other actors who are billed in the series. She's noted as starring on The People vs. Emil Blonsky, which feels much more appropriate to highlight such starring credit since it applies just to that episode. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:36, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
I think it would be okay to include her since she was listed as a normal cast member, not a special guest or anything like that, but I am not against taking her out since she is obviously just doing a cameo appearance (two scenes with barely any lines). @NickH: yes it is subjective to exclude her but that is fine as long as there is consensus here among editors that her exclusion is justified. And if we decide not to give her a bullet in the cast list then we should be consistent and exclude her from the infobox as well. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
I feel like we should be consistent with how we're keeping Debra and Fred as bulleted WandaVision cast members. We have to understand that billing is oftentimes determined by how big of a name actors are, not necessarily by their importance to the story. That is the case for many films and TV shows (case in point: Superman (1978 film)#Cast), so I don't see a valid reason why this should be a special case. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I wouldn't liken this to Rupp or Melamed in WandaVision. Neither of them were playing "themselves" and I feel there is a clear distinction here, given that Megan Thee Stallion is a "prominent" public figure that she'd appear in the billing. But as I noted in my response to Nickh above, if you look at the actual end credits, she is way down the cast list among the unnamed and minor named characters. Had she been further up in the list where say Holden Holloway or Dennis Bukowski are, then I think it's a different situation. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Again, consistency. Based on what Adamstom told me at Talk:Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness/Archive 2#Should the main cast list be based on theatrical release poster or in-movie end credits?, it is my understanding that we usually just look at the main titles for cast listings rather than the end crawl. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Sure, but if Megan appeared in a 2-hour film and was credited, that's one thing. If we're looking at the series as a whole, again noting that she's appearing as herself not some character, she's appeared in about 5 minutes if that in one episode of a nine episode series. I don't recall any other MCU project that's had someone appearing as themself be featured in the end billing. It feels appropriate to include her as starring at The People vs. Emil Blonsky, which she is, but here, it doesn't. And I know that makes me sound like I'm being selective, but for me it's all stemming from the fact that she's cameoing as herself. That's where the distinction is in my view. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Including her as starring in the episode’s page is even more inconsistent. A casual page viewer will not see Megan as a starring cast member in the show on this main page, then go to the episode page and not see her listed as a guest star for that episode. The infoboxes are supposed to provide quick and easy information, and for Megan to not appear in either the show’s or the episode’s infobox seems inappropriate for someone who IS credited with the main cast at the end of the day. NickH (talk) 19:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm torn on this. On the one hand, I get the point that she is not a character per say, and her role isn't very big (at least so far, we don't actually know if she appears in later episodes or not, right?). But on the other hand, she was given a starring credit, and as others have pointed out, we have had other MCU tv show cast members that only appear in one episode and we still give them the starring credits in the bulleted list. Also, I'm not sure how I feel about the reason we aren't listing her being that she isn't playing a fictional character. So if they had her play a fictional famous rapper named Lucy Thee Mare or something, we would include her? I don't know if that holds up as a good reason to not include her in this case. Since I don't see the problem with her being listed in the bulleted list (even if the role is small, other starring cast has also had pretty small roles), I'm going to vote to include her. CoolDudeAl (talk) 00:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree that Megan Thee Stallion should be billed alongside the rest of the starring cast. She is credited as a starring cast member with everybody else, so the fact that she is playing herself or only appeared in one episode is irrelevant. InfiniteInjustice (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

It's a glorified cameo that doesn't really improve the viewers' understanding of the show or the MCU in general. Considering that She-Hulk is going to have lots of characters, not everyone needs to make the cut. We might even have to narrow it down to just people from the wider MCU and those credited in the main billing for at least 3 episodes or something like that. — Starforce13 17:33, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

If that’s the consensus that is reached, than it is fine to remove her but the general rule for now is if a cast member is credited as main cast, than they remain so. The 3 episode rule should also have to apply to Wandavision or any other MCU show that is more than 6 episodes if implemented. InfiniteInjustice (talk) 20:14, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Jabs at Comicsgate

Should the show's willingness to not shy away from calling out the Comicsgate/ Fandom Meance crowd be mentioned? This definitely feels like the first time these people have been made fun of in a mainstream series. This and the increased attention they've gotten for their response to The Rings of Power indicates an important turning point, as even ordinary people not normally aware of the whole internet culture-war nonsense is finally having enough of these people. 46.97.170.32 (talk) 10:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

If reliable sources talk about it, then yes. DonQuixote (talk) 11:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Rating page

Shouldn't the ratings for episodes beyond 1-4 be on the main page? All there is is a graph. 75.22.17.130 (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

The ratings for episodes 5 & 6 are there. — SirDot (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Nielsen ratings

To avoid further edit warring, I am going to open a discussion about the Nielsen ratings that Gaius Sallustius Crispus has been trying to add, with Centcom08 as the one reverting. Looking at the edits and its respective summaries (+ searching on Google), it seems like the detail has not been covered by reliable sources and might not be important for inclusion in the article. So, should the detail about She-Hulk not being included in Nielsen's Top 10 ratings be included in the article? (And it seems like we haven't included Nielsen ratings in the other articles...) Jolly1253 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

If we have to search for reliable sources in order to support something, then it's probably not that notable. DonQuixote (talk) 15:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
I agree with DonQuixote. We would be giving undue weight to something that's not notable enough to have been widely covered by notable sources.— Starforce13 15:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Concur. Making the Nielsen SVOD rankings would be worth including since it's often repeated by places like THR, Deadline, etc. (Otherwise, the way the list is set up, it'd be lost to the ether the next week.) However, not making the top 10 is inclusive of an exorbitant number of shows every week, which is not notable. If this was considered some kind of catastrophic failure to miss the top 10, then that might be worth including, but in that case, it would be reported in secondary sources. -2pou (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Reliable sources usually just cover the top 10 series each week and the premiere was not in the top 10 for minutes watched. -- Zoo (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Variety eventually released an article corroborating this, and the show did make the Streaming Top 10 for Aug 22 - 28. I readded the section to include both pieces of information, and now that it has made the list it is less likely to incite anger.
https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/ Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Also to be clear it is the fact that it was the first Marvel show to not do so which makes it a noteworthy thing to include. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
There's really only one piece of relevant information to add:
  1. This show's premiere had the lowest viewership of any Marvel TV show premiere so far, failing to make any Top 10 lists the week of its premiere. There are many sources that mention and commentate on this: - Variety: https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/ - GameRant: https://gamerant.com/she-hulk-nielsen-streaming-charts-fail-marvel-studios/ - Youtube videos with 100k+ views.
In my edits, I tried to avoid that specific phrasing in order to split the difference, but there are viewers pretty intent on sanitizing the information from this article.
I think we have more than established the relevance of the premiere's viewership, but I'd like to find the best way to include it. Ideally, we could add a table for viewership or include it as a column in the existing episodes table, and include information for all episodes so that the mention of its relative poor viewership is not the sole focus of the change.
But I am pretty adamant we not sanitize the information regarding the premiere's viewership. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

In light of the new source provided above, together with GameRant's article about this, I'm going to open this discussion again to decide that this should be included or not. Although I've contributed by helping to move the references and editing the format of the templates, I'm still uncertain about including this in the article. It has since been removed (I disagree with the edit summary, though). Jolly1253 (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

As pointed out above, most shows aren't in the top ten. Also, unless there's an in-depth analysis, it's just trivia at this point (WP:NOTEVERYTHING and WP:INDISCRIMINATE). DonQuixote (talk) 10:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
This was the first Marvel show to not make the Top 10 its opening week, as the sources mention, which is perfectly noteworthy and has been covered in multiple places and YouTube videos. See also Variety Magazine at https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/.
It's the lowest-viewership premiere of any Marvel TV show so far, which is certainly noteworthy. I do think this specific phrasing would draw more ire though. I believe the information should be included in a least-biased way as possible, but it's perfectly relevant and noteworthy. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I think ultimately the best way to do this would be to include all of the ratings for all of the episodes (relevant) and mention the premiere viewership offhand, so it is not the only information as to viewership. But it's all clearly relevant information that we don't need to sanitize from the page. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
The Variety article does not state that it is the first Marvel series to miss the top ten, nor does it state that it has the lowest ratings of any Marvel series. Gamerant is a dubious source at best, as can be confirmed by the author’s credentials when accessing the article.
Whether or not missing the top ten, per Variety, is notable enough to include would be the question. Seems completely WP:Undue to me. 2604:2D80:6A8D:E200:DD5:AB65:5DBC:2016 (talk) 21:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Ms. Marvel missed the top 10 multiple weeks, which was the first time one of the live action MCU series did that. Also have to keep in mind the length of episodes as the top 10 is comprised of minutes watched each week. -- Zoo (talk) 21:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes, but its premiere did place at #10.
https://whatsondisneyplus.com/ms-marvel-debuts-on-the-nielsen-streaming-chart/ Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, I see what you're saying. It turns out that this claim was effectively not correct, as She-Hulk got more viewership minutes (390M) than Ms Marvel (357M) and also more households tuned in.
It's still probably relevant to mention it being the first show to fail to make the Top 10 as a relative measure, and this was noteworthy enough to be covered by multiple sources, but all of this information should be included at the same time. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Height of Maliah Arrayah

Article gives 6ft 7in but many online sources state just (sic) 6ft 5in. Is there a definitive reference? --AlisonW (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

The two sources used in article confirm this, as discussed/revealed by Coiro. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Review bombing

Should we include the review-bombing of the film, I mean it is going on and it even got into the news? Dangervest69 (talk) 01:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Probably not, user voted scores in easily rigged online polls are not something that belongs in an encyclopedia article (see WP:UGC and WP:TVRECEPTION) it just doesn't seem noteworthy. Maybe if reliable mainstream WP:SECONDARY sources actually say something about audience reaction that might be worth mentioning that, but any alleged review bombing is only of interest because of what it says about audience response. (I'm very skeptical of the overall Rotten Tomatoes scores for any TV series because they are so heavily biased in favor of only a few preview episodes given to critics for review, and are not representative of the full season or series as a whole.)
It would be better if the article included Nielsen ratings or other more reliable types of information, but it takes a little longer for that kind of detail to become available. -- 109.78.207.72 (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't see this earlier, I included a couple quick lines citing a handful of articles regarding the review bombing, and that it might be partially to blame for the series' 35% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Is that fine? AKA Casey Rollins Talk With Casey 20:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
All info that was added came from unreliable sources. IP editor is correct that it isn't, as far as I've seen, discussed in length by reliable secondary sourcing. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Savage She-Hulk

In the final episode, the show was titled on screen as savage she-hulk, in the dream sequence.223.187.252.51 (talk) 12:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

And? Article notes this with all the other title card changes in the season. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Cast Breakdown Importance

Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.223.187.252.51 (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it helps track who is recurring or "important" roles to include in the section here should there ever be any disagreements. We have concrete data to look at with the credits to reference. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Is it normal for a television infobox to list so many cast members or is that recent bloat? -- 109.79.75.196 (talk) 02:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Malia Arrayah's height.

This is a simple thing that needs to be corrected. The Polygon article cited, says she's 6'7, but on all her social media accounts, her bio on her casting agency's site, and most articles about her work on She Hulk, she's listed at 6'5. 143.60.240.96 (talk) 23:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Episode posters

Are there any posters available for the episodes that don't have an image yet? Gonnym (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Gonnym unfortunately not. After an initial batch around the first few episodes (many of which were generic thematic posters, not episode specific) there were not many released for the later episodes. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
We'll probably have to go the Previously On route and use stills for the latter episodes. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Wow, I thought more episodes had a poster in their infobox, but only 2 do. We got kind of spoiled with Moon Knight and Ms. Marvel. -- Zoo (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
The stills will have to be justifiable with standout moments or commentary. And if some don't have any, that's perfectly fine too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
We can use some posters from here if we want. BigLordFlash (talk) 18:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Character posters aren't typically used in the Infobox. -- Zoo (talk) 19:04, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Not sure about the other episodes, but Ep. 9 had a lot of K.E.V.I.N. commentary, so we can do that for sure. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm sure the first episode also has plenty of options. Bruce training Jen and the Captain America conversation to name a couple. Although I'm not sure if using a still from the post credit scene would work or not. -- Zoo (talk) 09:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
An idea that I have had is using screenshots from the end credits. There are definitely some moments in the credits that are episode-specific (Jen talking about Captain America, Daredevil's walk of shame, Pug's shoe collection) that we could choose for each episode. As long as we get some commentary on the moment from the episode or from the credits themselves then that could be a unique approach for this show which still follows the guidelines. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:26, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
I think that could work. Here is a potential image for episode 1 from the credits if we go the Captain America route. Apparently someone with desktop access will have to be responsible for images because on my tablet they get slightly blurred when I take screenshots on Disney+. And plenty of options for commentary.
  1. She-Hulk's Captain America Virginity Theory Originated With Chris Evans
  2. Is Captain America a virgin? ‘She-Hulk’ solves this Marvel mystery.
  3. She-Hulk Scene Solves Mystery of Captain America's Virginity — and the Answer 'Absolutely Is Canon'
  4. Mark Ruffalo didn't warn Chris Evans about She-Hulk revealing Captain America's virginity status
  5. Kevin Feige Confirmed Details of How Steve Rogers’ Captain America Lost His Virginity for ‘She-Hulk’
-- Zoo (talk) 01:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The finale can definitely be KEVIN or anything from She-Hulk at Marvel Studios really. Four should be from the post-credits scene of Madisynn and Wong on the couch, and eight should probably be something with Daredevil. Outside of that, I'm open to whatever might work best, but feel if we can we should stick to screenshots/press images from within the episodes before we consider the "courtroom" drawings in the credits. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Cast breakdown

Breakdown of each episode's main on-end billing, plus cast list. Actors in bold indicate the first appearance of the character, with the episodes they appear in after.

—El Millo (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Including Maliah Arrayah

Why are you not including the On Set She Hulk Reference woman? She is listed with the rest of the cast in the episode credits.

CoolDudeAl (talk) 14:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

From the article proper: 6-foot-7-inch (2.01-meter) Maliah Arrayah served as the on-set reference and body double for She-Hulk. DonQuixote (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Special:Diff/1109265494. — SirDot (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

No, I mean why are we not including it on this talk page. I'm aware it's in the article. CoolDudeAl (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The talk page is a place to discuss how to improve the article. It's not the article. DonQuixote (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Because she's a "technical" credit. We don't actually see Arrayah appear on screen. In the same way that Oscar Isaac's brother was his on set double, we don't need to track this. The real purpose of this is to help quickly see who may or may not be a recurring character in the series, and Arrayah's already noted in the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
Ah, gotcha. That makes sense, and like you said people like her and Oscar Isaac's brother get mentioned in the articles under the character they were "doubling" or "referencing" for anyway. CoolDudeAl (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

No use trying to contribute

@Trailblazer101 Great idea reverting my 3 edits at She-Hulk: Attorney at Law without even as much as a hint how to solve the problem. Meanwhile, who Cody Ziglar is remains unknown, and as long as wikipedias syntax rules are followed, you and your ilk are apparently happy with that. But I actually have a life outside wikipedia and don't have the time going through every single rule every time I'm contributing. I'm tired of being berated for trying to help. I've done my last contribution. Good luck DIY. zwaa 18:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

@Therealzwaa, you've been here over three years and you think linking to any external link such as IMDB in prose is appropriate? Seriously? That's what you're complaining about? Jauerbackdude?/dude. 18:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
EXACTLY. In contrast to some, I don't live, breath and eat Wikipedia's syntax. I'm here to contribute, however I can, with information, which is the purpose of Wikipedia in the first place, not it's syntax.
If you have a problem with that, you're free to help me utilizing the proper way to inject the imdb reference instead of wasting my time. Again. zwaa 18:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
The only "proper way to inject the imdb reference" is in the external links section which already is. If Cody is notable enough for their own article, then you can create it and then wikilink it here. Indagate (talk) 18:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Finally, a constructive reply. Thanks. zwaa 18:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Instead of spending your precious time on a talk page venting and complaining on why you're not allowed to be disruptive with your edits, why don't you try to understand how to contribute to Wikipedia constructively? One thing you've now learned, is that we don't put external links within the text. If the link is appropriate, it goes in the "External link" section. Second lesson? IMDB is not a reliable source. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 18:45, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
There's no problem to solve. If the actor doesn't have a Wikipedia page, he just doesn't have one and there's nowhere to link. The only possible "solution" is to create the article, but that's a whole lot of work. Finally, you didn't contribute any information by adding those links, and if you don't know and don't want to learn about Wikipedia's syntax, then simply don't do any edits related to Wikipedia's syntax, or at least don't get upset when someone reverts edits you admitted didn't have enough knowledge to make. —El Millo (talk) 18:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Wow. I was not expecting a whole ordeal to be made out of this. There is a reason why Cody Ziglar does not have a Wikipedia article, and that is because they probably don't meet the WP:BLP guidelines for one to be made yet. If someone wants to know more about this person outside of their work to this series, they can search for it online. Wikipedia is not a home to all sorts of information at random. An IMDb link is meant for the external links section, not within the contents of the article, let alone being implemented like an internal link, as I explained in my edit. Wikipedia is for everyone to contribute. If you don't feel like that's working, I'm sorry. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:She-Hulk:_Attorney_at_Law/Archive_1&oldid=1214202008"