Talk:List of MCU Relationship Names

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

The table looks awesome! I'm not sure though what the Portmanteau/Fanciful Names distinction is supposed to achieve, though, because it makes it harder to sort by name. I would suggest to merge portmanteau/fanciful names to Pairing Name, add an aditional colum "Category" for slash, het, femslash, threesomes, etc. and merge the different tables into one. The problem with pairing names is that they are so random and if you don't know what a pairing names means, you won't know in which table to search to begin with, so it's better to have just one table that you can sort for different criteria. --Doro (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I did it the way I did it so it would be easier to find the specific pairing's names faster than what the list did (like the List of Harry Potter Pairing Names had). Then you can learn all the specific pairings names at ONCE - which is so much easier because they aren't so spread out. Maybe just had have the Portmanteau/Fanciful Names just merged together would be better. Otherwise I think the separate tables would be better. --Harpie (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I already went ahead and changed it. I think a glossary page is more useful if it names the term you are looking up and then defines it. If you want to know all the pairing names for a specific pairing you can sort by pairing, and if you are only looking for het, slash, femslash, or threesomes, you can sort by category. --Doro (talk) 20:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Would anyone mind if I did some reorganizing so that you don't have several separate entries for the same pairing randomly distributed throughout the page (instead they could all be in one box)? Please? --Sari (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I think that would make sense. Especially if you put the more common pairing first. I'd say go for it. --Alex (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I reorganized and added a bunch but there are still a few well-known/popular ships that I had trouble finding names for: Natasha Romanoff/Sam Wilson/Steve Rogers (possibly: Up all night to get Bucky) Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes/Sam Wilson (possibly: Freedom Threesome) Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes/Peggy Carter (possibly: Agent Winter Captain) Pepper Potts/James "Rhodey" Rhodes Pepper Potts/James "Rhodey" Rhodes/Tony Stark Jane Foster/Darcy Lewis (possibly just janedarcy) --Sari (talk) 07:46, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Rename Request

Can this page be renamed to "List of MCU Relationship Names"? There are moresomes on here, as well as names that are more frequently applied to gen relationships than the romantic ships they're associated with in the table. -the old briar pipe (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

On it --Alex (talk) 17:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
And done --Alex (talk) 17:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Wow, that's the fastest response I've ever received. Thanks! -the old briar pipe (talk) 17:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
It was at the top of recent changes when I looked. Just good timing :) --Alex (talk) 18:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

two things

1. I rolled back a destructive edit removing an incest ship.[1] Based on the edit comment, the person was removing content because they didn't like the ship. Please note that the goal here is to list all ships that fans ship, no matter what we personally think of those ships.

2. I find the way the list is split out to be confusing. Why is Steve/Peggy considered a "TV" ship when it appeared in the Captain America movie? Also it looks like the ships in the TV list are not in the other lists, even though they fit the criteria. Also someone created a separate "non-binary" list for Loki ships. Is it canon that Loki is nonbinary? (ETA: someone tells me it is comics canon, but not movie canon, and this page is for the movie fandom.) I would prefer that all ships be in one list and to add a column for "type" (slash, het, etc.) as well as number.--aethel (talk) 21:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to agree with you, the current organization didn't scale well, and there are a lot of genderbend works being ignored by this formatting. What alphabetization or numbering system would you prefer? -the old briar pipe (talk) 02:18, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Querying this again, since I think the page is even less readable/skimmable now. Any ideas? -the old briar pipe (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Eliminating Incest Table

There was a discussion over on Talk:List of Riverdale Relationship Names about not separating out the incest pairings into a separate table, and that a pairing, like Thorki for example, should be moved to the slash table, and I thought it might by good to have that discussion about this list as well -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm not sure what the point of that division was, tbh. I also mentioned in the section above that I think the marking of ships out into gender-based is ignoring canonical gender shifts or ambiguity in some of those ships. The upcoming Disney+ situation raises questions about the TV division as well. May I suggest we possibly look at a radical approach of maybe removing the sections altogether and alphabetizing by ship or even, idk, turning this page into a category instead? I'd be happy to do some heavy-lifting if needed; I just don't know how to make the current organization scale. -the old briar pipe (talk) 06:23, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I honestly don't think the incest division is that big of a problem. Because there's so many ships I find it improves readability. I also don't think it implies anything is fundamentally wrong about incest ships considering there's nothing derogatory. I'm sure some incest fans would view incest shipping as a different type of shipping and some would not. (That being said, incest isn't really my thing, so it's possible I'm missing a more fannish perspective.)
I do think User:Briar pipe has a good point though, that the Disney + situation is going to make the TV (and crossover) category a mess. I kind of like the idea of organizing all ships alphabetically, although if we do that it should probably be alphabetical by character name, not ship name (I mostly use these lists to learn ship names, and I think other people might as well.) -- Error cascade (talk) 08:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm in favor of removing the incest division. Claiming a ship is an incest ship has become a staple in shipping wars with a continually moving goalpost of what counts as incest. Placing a special emphasis on whether a ship is incest or not has become a red flag for that. --Doro (talk) 08:55, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Error cascade has a good point about using character names instead of ship names to alphabetize, and I agree with Doro about moving goalposts and intentional flagging for ship war purposes. This is just a straight up +1 comment. XD -the old briar pipe (talk) 02:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
I think with regards to the incest table it's more trouble than it's worth (even if it doesn't bother me personally). I guess I'm also tentatively voting for rearranging all the ships by just f/m, f/f, m/m instead of separating tv shows from films.-- Error cascade (talk) 05:05, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Honestly, I'm more worried about the f/m, f/f, m/m division than even the TV/movies ones. Loki is canonically genderqueer in the comics, and a number of characters were gender-changed in the MCU compared to comics and previous movies/cartoons, meaning that ships may appear as multiple options. If we're removing all of the other divisions anyway, why not remove all divisions period and just alphabetize? -the old briar pipe (talk) 03:04, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I do think you (User:Briar pipe) have a point with eliminating the gender categories but I'm concerned about readability? Even it it's all clearly alphabetized looking through a table of dozens of ships can get overwhelming. Of course, we could still separate pairings from poly ships, that would break it down a bit. We could even divide the alphabetized versions into a few tables, like subheading A-E, F-J, etc, something like that.
Another minor concern is that sometimes femslash shippers have sort of a fandom norm of looking for fandoms with f/f pairings and checking out the f/f pairings in a fandom specifically. -- Error cascade (talk) 05:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
As far as I remember, the earlier edits of the page I worked or saw was having sections only for het/slash/femslash/poly. From the brief glimpses I looked at the page through the edit history, we only had one issue where someone completely deleted the incest pairing from the page. Not sure why there was a separated category for them in the first place although I could see the potential in having it since if your just looking for those types of pairings, you find them much easier. I don't mind the Non-Binary category, I think that works.
I honestly think the Crossovers category should be used for crossovers pairings (if we have this category at all) between MCU & different fandoms and not within the MCU since all the characters are in the same universe despite the different films or shows they might only appear in. The same goes with the TV category - I think those pairings needs to be merged back with the other Het/Slash/Femslash/Poly/Nonbinary categories. That would cut two unnecessary categories for readability.
You can automatically alphabetize the table already by characters or the ship names and you can click on the category to go straight to the section of the page you want to view, so I think the format if it goes back to being separated only by Het/Slash/Femslash/Poly/Nonbinary categories would be fine. Its much easier to view and jump around on the page that way. The MCU fandom is huge, and fans of it kinda expect some of the pages dealing with it to be long. I don't think it would be too overwhelming if utilize this format.--Harpie (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I guess where I'm standing is that we: 1) Keep the gender categories as is (although I do understand why briar pipe is concerned. 2)Remove the division between TV and films, since that's where the MCU is headed anyways and there's already some confusion in the categories. 3)The crossover section (if we keep one) is only for ships like Tony Stark/Bruce Wayne, not in verse TV/film crossovers. :) -- Error cascade (talk) 03:46, 19 July 2020 (UTC)