Board Thread:Administrative/@comment-24800939-20171119204541/@comment-61022-20171120181541

Instead of diving into specific issues here, I propose we create a resource where we can address all these issues on a case-by-case basis.

This proposal would see the creation of an editorial section which addresses these issues and how the Wiki, in particular, chooses to address these issues. Not only as a final resolution between differing opinions but as a resource we can direct other users so that we adopt a uniform approach of addressing these issues wherever they may come up.

Here's how I would break that down:

1) An Editorial Portal, which explains what the section of the site is for, its intents. This should then break down to sub-pages that deal with specific topics. Most of these would be different "families" of characters (Fantastic Four, Hulk, Iron Man, Spider-Man, Avengers, Captain America, etc.) as well noteworthy historical events and how they are affected by Marvel continuity and sliding timescale (World War II, Vietnam War, 9/11, depictions of famous/historical people etc.)

2) On the subpages, there will be links to the issues at hand. IE: variations on origins, How old a character is (roughly), how a person is affected by the Sliding Timescale, how relationships are interpreted, how real-world references should be interpreted etc. Each of those subjects link to their own page.

3.) The issue page will break down like so:
 * The issue at hand
 * The various different references to said issues (what comics they are referenced in)
 * How the most current handbook entry address that issue (with references)
 * Identify semi-official sources (The Appendix and Chronology Project) deal with the issue (if applicable)
 * Marvel Staff opinion or editorial statements (from letter pages, blogs, whatever) on the issue. (if applicable)

4.) Wikia editorial position. What census is made by the community on how we choose to interpret and place these conflicting items. In most cases, this section would be listed as "pending community feedback" or lists proposed methods of documenting it on our site and invitation to discuss (see below)

These pages should be locked so only admins/moderators can add to them. Discussion/debate/voting can then be carried out on the talk page.

Majority vote is what our editorial position would be, the issue is considered resolved until such a time there is significant change otherwise.

Going forward, I think that we should approach all of these editorial pages from scratch, ignoring how we've chosen to document the issue in question previously. That original documentation can be used as discussion points, but we should blank slate it so everyone has a chance to do the research.