-9

Is there an official Marvel Cinematic Universe viewing order?

  • This answer is an ever-growing list which looks good for community wiki thing.

  • Other users update the answer time to time (when new MCU property is released).

  • The original answerer has earned lots of reputation already. Although, this shouldn't be a reason to make the answer community wiki, it points out that it shouldn't be considered a loss to OP besides he is cashing on mostly others' work now.

Should we convert the answer into community wiki?

| |
  • Show us your research, have you tried to make it CW? – Möoz May 11 '17 at 20:46
  • @Mooz Mods can do it. – Beebo May 12 '17 at 6:43
8

My gut instinct is to say no, for the simple reason that the OP didn't just post a list of the current films and then abandon it. Since it was posted, they've made an additional 14 edits with their original text and additional changes representing some 90% of the current text.

As such, their contribution to this answer represents a significant investment of their time and effort, for which they should be rewarded with any continuing rep.


That's not to say that we shouldn't revisit this every couple of years, when the contribution of the community may have started to outweigh their contribution more heavily.

| |
7

We should not do anything.

Per this question and the two answers, "no answer should be made CW". Sure, a user may choose to make an answer community wiki should they feel so, but it's never an obligation.

We could break this down by pros and cons:

Pros:

  • None? If I understand this correctly, the only thing that will change is the amount of rep required to edit the post without the review queue: from 2000 to 100. Do we need that? Who needs that? It's not like we desperately need drive-byers to add a valuable piece of information - well, we do, but it could be as easily done by anyone who has watched the films, which, judging by the number of questions, is a lot.

Cons:

  • Main contributor will lose rep

    • Here I disagree with your assertion that they're mostly getting rep for other users' work - it appears that the poster has been revisiting the answer regularly, and updating it, to the point when the majority of the post still belongs to them.
  • We'll have less quality control - that's the downside of the lowered rep requirement. It's not really a bad thing (as one can catch that easily), but still.

Regardless of what we think, per this blog post, all parties should be consulted when making an answer a community wiki - meaning the final decision always rests with the answerer.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .