This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
@Favre1fan93: Not to champion unsourced content, but In [YEAR], the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". is the standard wording found on virtually every film listed National Film Registry#Films. We're going to get a lot of attempts to change it back if we choose to deviate from this convention. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that this was released as the first film of phase 1 of the MCU is ridiculous nonsense.
If this movie had lost money there would not have been any other Marvel movies for a while and maybe not anymore at all.
The fact that it was a success is why there even was an MCU. You should talk to somebody who lived through the time before you start writing ridiculous things like that, that is just plain freaking ridiculous. Just like everybody else who makes movies, they had no idea if this was going to be a success or not. They made the best movie they could and they took their chances. But there were no guarantees it was going to be a success at the box office 166.194.136.61 (talk) 00:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, it is the first film of phase 1 of the MCU. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It ends with Nick Fury mentioning the Avenger Initiative to Tony Stark so the plans were clearly there. The Incredible Hulk was released merely six weeks later and would absolutely have been released no matter how Iron Man turned out. Robert Downey Jr. has a cameo as Tony Stark. We don't know what would have happened if Iron Man did poorly but it's not like Marvel suddenly said "Hey, this is popular, let's turn it into a series." PrimeHunter (talk) 01:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Withdrawn, yes, it appears the Jaws example threw me and I misinterpreted PRIMARYFILM. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:37, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. WP:PRIMARYFILM doesn't allow any kind of PDABs. The added ambiguity of the proposed title does not help readers at all. 162 etc. (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Favre, I believe you've misinterpreted PFILM. The guideline specifically prohibits film articles from using partial disambiguation, see the Titanic example in the bulleted list. Under PFILM, the only options for this film would be Iron Man (2008 film) or Iron Man, and obviously that second one is out of the question. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
.jpg){kind=small}
