Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:41, 9 May 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 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 Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Comics: Marvel / Films Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Related work groups: /  This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group. This article is supported by Comic book films work group. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Film: Comic book / American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm This article is supported by the Comic book films task force. This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

A fact from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 March 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, use of the alien race Sneepers was initially rejected by Marvel's legal department because it sounded too similar to snípur, the Icelandic word for clitoris? A record of the entry may be seen at Misplaced Pages:Recent additions/2016/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Awesome Mix Vol. 2

Album is out April 28, track list soon. Plus, for the eventual article, here's the album cover from Gunn (and source for the other info). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Tokyo premiere?

@Richiekim and TriiipleThreat: Pretty sure this is just like the first film and was a press tour screening, not a "premiere". Comparable (I think) to this: "On July 12, 2014, Gunn and the actors from the film promoted Guardians of the Galaxy at the Lido 8 Cineplex in Singapore." at Guardians of the Galaxy (film)#Marketing. I thought we had a talk page discussion about this, but there's nothing in the archives. Let me know what you think. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Was the film shown?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure. From some of Gunn's recent social media, it might have, but I don't have anything concrete to pull from at the moment to confirm. Also, in regards to what I think is a similar situation to the first film, I added the info to the first film in regards to Singapore, much like Richie did here, as its premiere. I then reverted it to as it currently stands here, after you, Richie, Adamstom.97 and Sock (FKA Corvoe) discussed if Singapore really was the first film's premiere on my talk page here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Source for cameo

I honestly couldn't tell if this Guillermo (security guard from Jimmy Kimmel) thing was real or not, or if the clip they showed will be actually in the film. But if it is, here's a source. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Guardians Volume 2 runtime officially classified

Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 2 officially classified as 136 minutes long: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/guardians-galaxy-vol-2-2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.120.51 (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

 Added - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Number of end-credit scenes

At a press screening recently, I counted four end-credit scenes, but I recently saw an article claiming there are five. Once the film is out publicly, editors here might want to pay particular attention to the number since early reports aren't always accurate. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

By all accounts I have seen, there were indeed four end-credits scenes shown at the screenings. Knowledge of the existence of the fifth comes from James Gunn himself, implying that the last one was withheld from the screenings. I'd say Gunn is a pretty reliable source. - DinoSlider (talk) 16:50, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes Gunn was the one who stated there would be 5. As Dino said, I believe the fifth was withheld from the press screenings. In article, with the source we have, it stated four mid-credit ones, and then one (not seen) after the credits. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:44, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

He cleared it up in my interview, but in case I'm not able to fit it into my eventual article: There are indeed five scenes, he says, but concedes that some people indeed count four since the first one, which — NO SPOILER — involves one of the main characters getting hit with something in a slapsticky if painful way, at first glance looks to be part of the film proper.--Tenebrae (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

David Hasselhoff

So when the cast was introduced at the premiere, David Hasslehoff was amongst them. Rusted AutoParts 17:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• Hasselhoff has also stated that he cannot go into detail regarding his contract with Marvel, but that he can talk about the theme song.... this seems to indicate that he will appear in the film in some capacity. Perhaps he will play one of Stakar and Yondu's original team of Guardians that has been announced to appear in the film?...only time will tell.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 05:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Fillion as Wonder Man

There is new information regarding the actor's involvement in the film. The character which he plays is indeed Wonder Man, though it is not clear whether he will have his super-powers/-name in the film. The actor took to his Twitter account to show his character's look for the film, in one of his deleted scenes from the movie. Though it is not clear whether the scene is a 'meta'-scene of his character (seeing as the character will be an 'actor' in movies that take place within the fictional universe), or a scene which saw him as Wonder Man; his credit should be listed on the page's cast list. The reference can even mention that some of his scenes were deleted -- until it is clear whether his role will be entirely cut or not. I think we need to add his character to the credits.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 05:12, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and readded the information regarding Nathan Fillion's role in the movie, as director/writer James Gunn has now discussed the topic on his Twitter page. The role was confirmed, though the importance and depth of the role is not yet known, it is now common-knowledge that Simon Williams / Wonder Man is in the movie. That discussion can be viewed here.--71.35.227.6 (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)<--this was me, I didn't realize that I wasn't logged in before I submitted the edit.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

This has been deleted multiple times now, and yet I have sourced multiple references where Nathan Fillion was cast as Simon Williams / Wonder Man. Here again is the writer/director stating that Fillion was to portray the character though his cameo-scenes were deleted. He later states that the role may appear in a future film with Fillion in the role, as discussed here. Needs to be included on this page.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:51, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The fact that it has been deleted multiple times by other editors and yet you keep reinserting it means you are edit-warring. First off: Your very own source says your claim is not true. I quote James Gunn in that article: “For the record, that was never a scene in the movie – that’s simply @NathanFillion clowning around on set." Second, as you've demonstrated before, you are unfamiliar with many Misplaced Pages policies, guidelines and practices. Per WP:BLP, the first time you were reverted you were supposed to come to the talk page and — and this is the important part — gain consensus with other editors. You have not gained consensus here.

If you revert again, you are disrupting Misplaced Pages and, as before, this will be brought to admins' attention. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

And the fact remains that you continue to violate the Misplaced Pages policies, by engaging in WP:BULLY, WP:CIVILITY, and most of all WP:HOUNDING. If you have a SPECIFIC issue with me -- you should take it to my talk-page which you have not done. Thereby if you do it again, "it will be brough to admins' attentions". --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 11:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

In what way has @Tenebrae: been bullying or hounding you? You're choosing to defy basic WP:3RR guidelines and edit war as opposed to discussing the information. Rusted AutoParts 03:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

In the way that they have referenced "as before" -- there's a history here which is all in direct correlation to WP:BULLY, WP:CIVILITY by WP:HOUNDING. All I said has no argumentative nature, simply stating the facts.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 11:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Fillion should be included in the paragraph as he WAS cast to portray the character in still-photo cameo; regardless of the fact that he was 'horsing around' on the set of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 and released his own photo on his Twitter account. Gunn HAS stated that he is a fan of the idea of Fillion as Wonder Man, and in a sly comment said "we shall see ;)". The guy has included Howard the Duck, and talked about the Spaceknights being in the MCU -- it's very clear what the plan is. Though we cannot state so until he explicitly states such, the fact remains that Fillion had cameo scenes which were removed from the final cut of the film. Simply stating such in the Cast paragraph is constructive in that it gives credit where there would have been, had the scenes remained. No need to be demeaning when stating your opinion Tenebrae.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

There is so much speculation and POV conclusion-drawing in that anon IP's post it's not worth responding to. Nathan Fillion does not appear in the movie. Whatever may or may not be included in home-media releases is for the home-media section whenever something concrete is announced. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Per James Gunn tweet "@NathanFillion was Simon Williams in some movie POSTERS in a scene cut from the movie." Fillion himself never cameos in the film. The couple of fannish cites cited in this removed content were giving purely speculative extrapolation of that. Lots and lots of stuff gets cut from a film during editing — the plot and cast section only includes what's in the actual film itself. Extraneous claims go in trivia section, or home-media section or some other section. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Plot

Just to confirm, a private premiere is not a commercial public release. The film is not being released theatrically until April 28 in the UK and Ireland. We cannot insert a plot before then. And for the record, the one that was here was overlong and sloppily written. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Why is this based on the UK/Irish release? It was released in New Zealand and Australia on 24 April 2017. El Dubs (talk) 06:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Just for my own education, is there guidance / policy that we should wait until a commercial public release? I've never heard one way or the other if private premiere are acceptable for adding a Plot section to a movie. jmcgowan2 (talk) 11:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Spoilers?!?

No warning? No anything? Just a big pile of spoilers giving away the plot to the entire movie? Entirely unprofessional. 221.147.22.94 (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:SPOILERS, not only should we not avoid spoilers, but they are not labeled as such either. If you visit a wikipedia page for a movie and see that there's a section labeled 'Plot', it will most likely contain the full plot, including spoilers. (Assuming it's verifiable, and not based excusively on a 'gossip/tabloid/spoilers' website or show) jmcgowan2 (talk) 11:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

But the movie isn't even kind of out yet! The Talk Page even says the plot shouldn't be on there. 221.147.22.94 (talk) 02:34, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

As of today its out in Australia, Belgium, Colombia, Finland, France, Indonesia, Italy, Norway, Philippines and Sweden, so yeah, it's "kind of out". Sorry, champ, maybe you shouldn't be reading things about the movie if you don't want to be spoiled. Rusted AutoParts 03:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Suggested changes to cast list

First, Nova Corps didn't appear in the film at all, not even Irani Rael, so Glenn Close should be removed from the list. And second, Stan Lee didn't portray Uatu the Watcher. He was an old astronaut who simply spoke with Watchers who weren't interested of his story. CAJH (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

In addition to this edits continue to rephrase the paragraph in a giant run-on sentence. I have corrected it several times as far as grammar goes, but editors are engaging in edit-warring. I will wait until that dies down before I correct the issues with the paragraph and clean it up.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, CAJH -- producer Kevin Feige has confirmed at least that Stan Lee is portraying the same character throughout the entire MCU. That can be read here.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

The article was released after my comment. CAJH (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I am bringing a revert issue to this portion of the talk page. The paragraph under the primary cast list on this page has undergone various edits and many reverts. User:DisneyMetalhead has corrected oversized sentences to be more to-the-point. User:Rusted AutoParts in the reverts told DMetalhead that they need to come to the talk page to make those edits valid...? In my opinion, why is this even an issue? I took the issue to both of their pages as it has gone on a while now. Personally I think making the page more correct as far as the English language goes is a constructive edit. As far as Stallone's role in the film goes, the film's writer/director has called the character "Starhawk" so the reverts on that one are strange to me too (not in a good Doctor Strange way). Anyhow, I'm bringing this here as neither of the previously-stated editors have yet.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 18:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Because it was disputed content. DisneyMetalHead refused to discuss with the other reverting editors and continued adding it in. It's cute you think you have a grasp on the situation, but you clearly don't. Rusted AutoParts 20:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

If the filmmakers had wanted the character called Starhawk, they would have called the character Starhawk, either in onscreen or the onscreen credits. Having made the choice not to do so, any comments they make afterward are simply casual, shorthand colloquialisms. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Some of the editors on this site are completely and utterly arrogant. RAP -- you needn't degrade others when you respond to a clearly constructive comment made by Special:Contributions/50.232.205.246. Something I've found with Wikipedians is that they feel as though they need to tare others down, not too dissimilar to fanboys and bloggers on the internet. Misplaced Pages is not about WP:WINNING. You need to remember that. You are clearly creating friction as it was stated in your revert comment that I needed to come here. How and why I need to come to a talkpage in regards to correcting grammar and sentence structure, is completely ludicrous. The paragraph below the cast listing on the page is one HUGE run-on sentence and needs to be corrected. I have done so but you continue to revert my edits. What's your reasoning? As far as the whole Stallone is Starhawk thing -- the actor has signed on for multiple films. What MCU characters are called by their full name in any post-credits/cameo scenes??.... (i.e. in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver are not even named, but as common-knowledge we acknowlege their cameo and characters' names). Editing becomes so petty and completely miniscule when you search for the minutia to disagree with. Let's talk about something that's actually debatable!--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

You're putting speculative content in by putting Starhawk. Was not once referred to as such in the film. You were reverted, you continued adding it back. I have no more patience for that anymore. Rusted AutoParts 00:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@DisneyMetalhead: I can remove comments on my own talk page if I choose to. And what you interpret as rudeness and incivility is frustration at seeing my watchlist bogged down with edits and reverts of specific issues made clear aren't notable or cited well enough to remain. So as opposed to try and say my behaviour needs to be discussed, discuss the content you persist in readding. Rusted AutoParts 00:58, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: the appropriate place for resolving an issue with an editor is their talk page, and the correct response is to hopefully resolve the issue. You admitting to a lack of patience^ is a step in the right direction. None of my edits are confrontational. All of them are constructive and done in good-faith. What about James Gunn calling Michelle Yeoh's character 'the FEMALE Starhawk' doesn't make sense to everyone? She's the female counterpart to Stallone. Stallone is a MALE. Oh, wait that makes him the MALE Starhawk. Simple. Basic. You telling me to come to the talkpage for corrections to grammar and run-on sentences makes absolutely zero sense.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 13:35, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

What you're doing is called WP:SYNTH. Again, if Gunn had wanted to call Stallone's character Starhawk in either dialog or end credits, he would have done so. He did not. Please respect the filmmaker's choices. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

And no one said to come and discuss "corrections to grammar and run-on sentences". It's pretty clear which one we're referring to. Rusted AutoParts 15:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

And yet User:Rusted AutoParts any of us that look at the history can see that you reverted the edits that corrected the run-on sentences. User:Tenebrae you need the character's name stated in the movie, and we credit Thanos in the first Avengers movie? Your reasoning is an enigma. The director called him Starhawk. --50.232.205.246 (talk) 23:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

He's not called Thanos in the plot section of The Avengers (2012) film. The cast section says that Feige confirmed the character is Thanos, with a footnote and Feige's exact quote. I'm not sure how that's a comparison with Fillion who, unlike Thanos, never appears in the movie. Fillion is indeed mention where he should be — in the post-production section. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Okay I'm sorry, but when I make constructive edits simply correcting grammar disfunction and overloaded run-on sentences and the edits are reversed I don't see the purpose of such a move from anyone.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps User:Rusted AutoParts and other users appearing to be engaging in edit warring didn't mean to reverse those specific edits(?). Or at least that's what we would all hope. On the flip side if that is what they are doing, they need to own up to what they're doing, and stop in the process too.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 19:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

At what point did I edit war over this information? Rusted AutoParts 19:22, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Rusted AutoParts you seemingly did (along with other editors) when you continuously revert edits with the edit summary of "lol". Each and every time you have done so without stating your reasoning here first, you are likewise 'edit warring'. We can see that you first did so because of the Stallone "Starhawk" differences. User:DisneyMetalhead your edits of that discussion also included your paragraph revisions; but given that you have now done so separately editors should leave your paragraph edits alone as they are solely for the purposes of English grammar.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 19:46, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

...Seriously? Those were edits on my talk page, not this article. I am fully free to decide what can remain on my own talk page. I'm sorry but you really don't seem to understand the situation or what you're accusing me of. Rusted AutoParts 19:48, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

No, I understand what's going on as anyone can follow the page's edit history. DisneyMetalhead started off revising the paragraph below the cast listing, while also changing Stallone's credit to Stakar / Starhawk. You reversed that because of the fact that Stallone isn't referenced as Starhawk in the film (even though that's who the character is). What I am saying is that you reversed the "Starhawk" edits, and in the process that also changed the paragraph layout. I just said that you weren't edit warring four bullet points previous to this one...I am following the discussion just fine.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Id have to beg to differ considering you didn't even know which edit summaries were from what edit. Please stop pinging me, this "issue" disinterests me. Rusted AutoParts 20:04, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Why be hostile, if you didn't do anything? The editors on this site, are frustrating elitest and it's revolting. Whoever is reverting my sentence corrections has an oversized ego. Not saying it's you, but whoever it is it's counterproductive.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 23:09, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

You're wasting my time and accusing me of undoing edits I didn't undo. And this "editors are elitest" mentality isn't gonna gain you any allies. What you perceive as elitism is really much more seasoned editors keeping the article in compliance with the MOS implemented on all of these articles. Rusted AutoParts 00:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Pending revisions

I was just curious, for anyone else working on this article who understands how this system works, what exactly is the criteria for getting edits automatically accepted? From what I have read, the pending revisions system is meant to avoid vandalism from IPs and new users (of which I am neither), so I'm just a little confused as to why my edits aren't showing up straight away (not to mention being rolled back with all the other vandal-type edits). - adamstom97 (talk) 20:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Adamstom.97 As the system is documented, your edits should be showing up straight away. By looking at the logs () you are an extended confirmed user which means your edits should be automatically excepted, but that isn't happening which is weird. I would reason it might be a bug, but I went ahead and confirmed your edits anyway. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Winner, I thought something weird was happening. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:11, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Watcher's Informant

Stan Lee's cameo should be specified as "The Watcher's Informant," as per the end credits, rather than merely "an astronaut." That implies he's simply a human character of no real significance. It is true that Lee isn't confirmed within the film as a Watcher himself, but he is at least relating information on the Avengers to the group. Not to mention his credit as "The Watcher's Informant" is the only place in the film where the beings' identities as Watchers is actually confirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.1.193.25 (talk) 00:48, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that credit? I don't remember seeing it and the credits in the press kit from Disney don't include it. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, though the film credit isn't listed here], producer Kevin Feige states that Stan Lee's character is "doing work for the Watchers". That would back up the statement and argument above.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

The press kits usually just list main cast, not specific cameos so they're more of a surprise for viewers. You'll notice Nathan Fillion, Seth Green, Miley Cyrus and others aren't credited in the kit either. And yeah, "The Watchers' Informant" was Lee's credit in the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.1.193.13 (talk) 18:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I saw this as well. It's how he should be credited on the cast list, instead of being 'an astronaut'.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 19:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Production Cost?

Could someone please add the actual or estimated production cost? Thanks. N0w8st8s (talk) 09:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)n0w8st8s

Cast credits

These official cast credits, given to press, are incomplete. They don't include "Watcher informant ... Stan Lee," "Voice of Howard the Duck ... Seth Green", "Charlie-27 ... Ving Rhames" or others that appear in the onscreen credits, presumably excluded to avoid spoilers — which certainly doesn't do accuracy and posterity any good. Anyway, here's what Disney released.

CAST

• Peter Quill/Star-Lord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHRIS PRATT
• Gamora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ZOE SALDANA
• Drax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DAVE BAUTISTA
• Baby Groot (Voice) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIN DIESEL
• Rocket (Voice) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .BRADLEY COOPER
• Yondu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MICHAEL ROOKER
• Nebula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . KAREN GILLAN
• Mantis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POM KLEMENTIEFF
• Stakar Ogord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SYLVESTER STALLONE
• Ego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . KURT RUSSELL
• Ayesha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ELIZABETH DEBICKI
• Taserface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHRIS SULLIVAN
• Kraglin/On-Set Rocket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SEAN GUNN
• Tullk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOMMY FLANAGAN
• Meredith Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LAURA HADDOCK
• Young Ego Facial Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AARON SCHWARTZ
• Sovereign Chambermaid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HANNAH GOTTESMAN
• Sovereign Pilot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HILTY BOWEN
• Sovereign Admiral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BEN BROWDER
• Zylak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALEX KLEIN
• Zylak’s Frenemy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LUKE COOK
• Retch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EVAN JONES
• Oblo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JOE FRIA
• Narblik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TERENCE ROSEMORE
• Halfnut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JIMMY URINE
• Brahl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STEPHEN BLACKEHART
• Gef . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STEVE AGEE
• Huhtar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .BLONDY BARUTI
• “Down There!” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RICHARD CHRISTY
• Unseen Ravager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ROB ZOMBIE
• Robot Courtesans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SIERRA LOVE, KENDRA STAUB, MILYNN SARLEY
• Sneeper Madame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RHODA GRIFFIS
• Officer Fitzgibbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MAC WELLS
• Weird Old Man . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .JIM GUNN, SR.
• Weird Old Man’s Mistress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .LEOTA GUNN
• Easik Mother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ELIZABETH LUDLOW
• Young Peter Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WYATT OLEFF
• Grandpa Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GREGG HENRY
• Grandpa Quill’s Friend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DAMITA JANE HOWARD

--Tenebrae (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Can we reference this list? I ask because Evan Jones' character is listed on the page as "Wrench", which is clearly a typo since the cited source says "Wretch". However, this lists the spelling as "Retch". - DinoSlider (talk) 15:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

While incomplete, what's here reflects what's onscreen. Now that the movie has come out, we don't need cites for simple cast listings. I would go ahead and change it to Retch and remove the now-outdated cite.--Tenebrae (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 budget officially revealed

According to the LA Times, Guardians Vol. 2's budget is $200 million dollars: http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-movie-projector-guardians-of-the-galaxy-20170502-htmlstory.html. I hope we can add this onto the Wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.22.19.82 (talk) 13:44, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Additional billed actors?

In the opening billing of the film, plus the production notes PDF, Tommy Flanagan and Laura Haddock are listed, between Sean Gunn and Sly Stallone. Should we replicate that here as well, or stick to the poster billing? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:42, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I would understand if we wanted to do this, but I don't feel their roles in the film really justify it. It's not quite the same as Falcon secretly having a pretty big role in Ant-Man, at least for me. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:48, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Paragraph layout

Someone on here keeps on reverting editors' constructive edits in regards to proper grammar. I bring this up because there have been several editors who have made the paragraph involving extra cast more to-the-point and in the same style as other pages. However, these edits keep on being reverted and without reason. I would like whoever keeps doing it to come to this section and 'own' their actions, and then tell the rest of us why they keep doing it? It's edit-warring and you have no reason to revert others' edits except to edit-war. It's frustrating as anything to watch such behavior occur on Misplaced Pages over and over and over. Particularly User:DisneyMetalhead has brought up those edits before on this talk page, just a couple of paragraphs above here, and no one had issues with those edits while the discussion occurred. Whoever is doing it needs to A) stop, or B) come here and explain what their reasoning is.--50.232.205.246 (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? - adamstom97 (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

This user is referencing where I change the run-on sentences to read the actors listed first, and then who they all play second with the word 'respectively' afterward. For example: "Additionally, reprising their roles from the first film are ____. _____, ____. and _____, as _____, ____, ____, and ___ respectively." And then the paragraph continues to ramble on in a run-on sentence each time it lists the teams: Yondu's Ravagers, and Yondu and Stakar's Ravager Elders teams. Rather than following format, and proper English they say: "____ as ____, ____ as ____, ____ as ____....." which is poor English and a run-on sentence. Listing them as I had each and every edit, in the above example eliminates the over usage of "as" in what they are now, deletes excessive paragraph size, condenses information, and follows proper paragraph and sentence structures. Thanks 50.232.205.246 for picking up on that. Get's old making constructive edits only to have petty reversals done by multiple editors.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 23:14, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

That formatting is just unnecessarily difficult for people to read. With long lists of actors and their characters like that, it is best to make it clear to the reader who is playing whom (rather than readers having to count through the list to match up any specific one you want). There is no problem with saying "Here is a list of actors and their characters:" and then listing them in a simple way for people to read. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class Comics articles
• Low-importance Comics articles
• C-Class Comics articles of Low-importance
• C-Class Marvel Comics articles
• Marvel Comics work group articles
• C-Class comic book films articles
• Comic book films task force articles
• WikiProject Comics articles
• C-Class film articles
• C-Class American cinema articles
• American cinema task force articles
• WikiProject Film articles
• Misplaced Pages Did you know articles