The Adaptation tags that are being used in character pages are categorizing them under this very category, is that supposed to happen? Because there's this other category that is supposed to be their place.
--The Many-Angled One (talk) 03:46, February 3, 2017 (UTC)

We never discussed using the banner on anything other than actual materials; however, if there's a need, I can create a second template, say "Adaptation2" or something similarly named, that properly sorts content to the content category, though it would require all the non-material articles to be manually amended to the new template's name, which isn't that big of a deal if it'd have to be deleted on all those otherwise anyway. Thoughts? -- Annabell (talk) 04:37, February 3, 2017 (UTC)
I think it's also good to have a banner for semi-canon characters.
--The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 05:35, February 3, 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I've created Template:Adaptation2 for that, the miscategorized character articles will just need the template name corrected then. -- Annabell (talk) 05:47, February 3, 2017 (UTC)
I kind of dislike this category but I might miss its usefulness. The other one (stuff adapted from other media into comics) has more interest, but this one, seems like a treasure for a badge hunter without much interest.Undoniel (talk) 19:35, March 23, 2017 (UTC)
That's partially because it still hasn't been cleaned out and thus remains full of content not materials. Eighty-four articles were incorrectly added by someone else, so that's over 42% of what's in here which belongs in the other category instead. (It's on my to-do list if nobody else gets 'round to it, but with over thirty projects there it's quite a ways down.) -- Annabell (talk) 22:24, March 23, 2017 (UTC)
I think we have to agree on the principle: What is clearly to be added to those categories ? Restricting to "stuff having appeared non-comics media and transposed into comics" seemed the best way to me (the most interesting information, because of course, the movies and video games are adapted from comics material, but only the reverse is truly something relevant to me), or at much "stuff having appearing in non-616 medias and transposed in 616 medias" (but that's too wide) (I say 616 but Prime universe is as good...).Undoniel (talk) 00:05, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
Per the original discussion, this out-of-universe category was to only be applied to physical objects that actually exist in our reality -- i.e. comics, novels, or video games -- which have been adapted from various other forms of Marvel media, such as animated series or films.
If the materials are not on the exemption list, then they might not fit within accepted continuity, and thus the article needs the apocryphal banner, not just the category. The banner and category are not supposed to be used on content and therefore have absolutely nothing to do with anything that requires a reality designation, be it Earth-616 or otherwise. -- 01:26, March 24, 2017 (UTC)

It's becoming confusing to speak of both categories here (I was talking more about the other category when mentioning realities...) (especially when the other category seems to have two different means regarding the people using it), so I will stop for now talking about the other one ("content adapted...") here. Just to be clear, if I understand you, "Materials adapted..." should only be added to medias (physical objects: a movie page, a comics volume page) and nothing else ? (if yes, I'm okay with that) Undoniel (talk) 09:52, March 24, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, exactly, the materials template and category only applies to medias, all the stuff with reality designations has the wrong template used and I'm not even sure if it belongs in that other category or not, I just know it doesn't belong here. -- Annabell (talk) 10:34, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
I'd like to point that the fact that the Template:Adaptation2 adds characters to the category Category:Content Adapted from Other Media goes against the main/original purpose of the category. Anthony Stark (Earth-58732) or Adrian Toomes (Earth-96283) are NOT characters originally appearing in Marvel media later adapted to the comics....--Shabook (talk) 12:55, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
Can we please try and focus, so that we talk about the category we're actually discussing on the correct category's talk page, as right now it's a mess that's confusing people who apparently don't pay enough attention to grasp that this category should have no articles which require reality designations associated with it whatsoever?
As for the concern regarding the other category, which we're talking about here for who knows that reason, I can change the Template:Adaptation2 so that it doesn't add any categories if that's preferred, but I've zero interest in spending more time policing that other category since it wasn't part of my proposal in the first place and is instead nothing but a headache that y'all who wanted it tacked on after the fact seemingly aren't willing to resolve on your own. -- Annabell (talk) 13:06, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
About to begin purging this category of everything that doesn't belong, and have devised what's hopefully an elegant solution to resolve the issues with the other one, but for now please patiently tolerate that fixing the incorrect usage of Template:Adaptation will initially exacerbate the concerns of the other category until the details of my burgeoning proposal to split the content side of this mess is potentially agreed upon. Thanks. -- Annabell (talk) 21:58, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.