Thread:AnnabellRice/@comment-3406131-20170218144909/@comment-3406131-20170324200309

AnnabellRice wrote: I honestly don't much care what happens with the content side of this. As I stated in my very first reply to Category Talk:Materials Adapted from Other Media, it was never my intention to use my proposal in that manner. My idea was explicitly concerned with the materials, so I'm not really interested in try to argue the merits of someone else's idea of what should be tacked on after the fact with the second template they asked me to make for characters and such. I had my "content adapted from other medias" idea for some time, so I assume when I saw the addition, I assumed it was what I meant (the editor had seemingly already done its work, or maybe it was me, I don't recall).

Maybe it's the category's name that is ambiguous. I will try to think of other formulations for both categories to stop the. Your template will make easier the changes between names (as you'll only have to change the template to change the category on the pages you're interested with). But we'll also have to change the description because currently, it fits more the goal I'm interested in than the one you are, and doesn't render the apocryphal/semi-canon aspects you want it to present.

On my side, I mentioned the reality and it forced me to think clearly what belong into the category or not: So no more need to talk about realities anyway, it's truly the media, mostly TV series, films, play(s) and video games transposed in comics, that are the main focus in my category. I will have to think about the case of novels in realities never see in comics and introducing new characters then introduced in comics (but I don't think there's one of those currently).
 * X23 was introduced in an episode of an animated series universe, and was transposed into comics universes. It's good.
 * Ava Orlova appeared in a comics of a movie. If she was to be transposed into comics versions, would she qualify based on the media she appeared on, or on the dominant media of the universe she was introduced in. Taking the example of 92' (which has switched of main media recently), I would think a 616 version of Ava Orlova would not be among my idea of category.

AnnabellRice wrote: That was my guess but precede that episode ? This one goes into "my" category.
 * Age of Apocalypse (Event) was adapted from One Man's Worth.

AnnabellRice wrote: Have we some reference, in order to explain to readers the presence of the category ? Same for this one.
 * You're correct, Darian Elliott (Earth-616) is supposedly an adaptation of Evan Daniels (Earth-11052) from X-Men: Evolution.

AnnabellRice wrote: If that's the purpose, then it totally fits, on the "controversial" aspect of "semi-canon" material, if it's considering either the novel could in fact not be fitting into the main medias of that reality. There was a lot of such discussion because of 199999 video games (Talbot appearing in Hulk video games, then in Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.). Those goes in "your" category.
 * As you stated, Ava Orlova (Earth-199999) was adapted from one type of material to another, and that was the stated intention of my apocryphal banner proposal, when something was adapted from one material to another and thus the canonicity was questionable, nothing to do with crossover of reality designations or whatever that other people have subsequently obfuscated the purpose with.

On my side, it doesn't have much interested as far: She was created in a comics of Earth-199999, so even if she would appear in Earth-616, herself was first a comics.

AnnabellRice wrote:* I don't really know anything about the video game stuff like Maya Lopez (Earth-701306), Adrian Toomes (Earth-96283), or Mangog (Earth-199999). I've never played those games and simply take a moment to move a few random articles out of the materials category sporadically whenever, as they most certainly don't belong there, in fact everything with a reality designation doesn't belong there, but I believe whomever it was that tagged them with the wrong template was probably thinking the video games were adapted from movies. Following the logic of your category, they might qualify, if their stories in the games can't or could not fit in the main universe that is presented in "more valuable sources" (or they do qualify, on the basis they are "tie-in" material ? I'm not sure where the delineation is on your idea), such as movies and TV series.

AnnabellRice wrote: Anyway, back to my main point, I know what I had in mind for the materials category, and I implemented that, but then someone else added dozens of additional articles that doesn't belong, and nobody else has bothered to fix it, even though they were the ones who wanted multiple categories and muddied the clear delineation established, so I guess I'll be forced to eventually get to it, but it's not high on my priority list. If we can manage to set the divide between those two kinds of adaptations, specifically the names of both categories and their description in order to avoid redundancy (from what I've seen, almost none of "mine" occur among "yours") and clarity (ambiguous description and name of the current category), I will take care of the other category.

(It doesn't interest your part of the stuff, but I prefer to wrote it down to recall it later: maybe I will rather put the disambiguation pages instead of reality-designated pages -if many versions exist-, as all the versions of the adapted character comes from there... Or maybe only the first, given later adaptions mostly inspire themselves from the main comics version. I will think of it.)

I hope I understood right your idea, because it took me some time to write this reply.