Talk:Scarlett Johansson

Black Widow / Scarlett Johansson
Does the prose mention Black Widow or that Johansson is an actor from the Marvel Cinematic Universe? If so, then it needs writing in. If not, I'm not sure that infobox is allowed here. It's worth checking on that. We can only report that the N-Space Scarlett Johansson is an actor in the MCU if the source tells us. :) The  Farty  Doctor   Talk  20:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Not only that, the infobox needs to go because it's way too much longer than the article's text. (See Tardis:Guide to images.) Shambala108 ☎  20:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Right, right. Two things:
 * Firstly, navoboxes can be conjecturally placed in pages. Practically most entries in navbox are based upon conjuncture.
 * Secondly, the size of the template has been discussed, and it needs to be converted to a "bottom of the page" style navbox. Additionally, many of the pages linked into the Marvel template suffer from the template being too large, so the removal from this page is kinda silly.  Epsilon  📯 📂 21:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm still wanting to know whether there needs to be some in-universe connection between Black Widow and Scarlett Johansson to allow this infobox to be here? The  Farty  Doctor   Talk  21:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

@User:Epsilon the Eternal it's policy, as I posted above. I suggest you read it. Shambala108 ☎  21:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * So to note the navbox also appears on Jack Kirby, however, a previous version of the navbox listed Kirby in it (added by Epsilon, as it so happened). This was removed by User:66 Seconds under T:NO RW along with some other moves and User:LegoK9 declined to revert the changes. Speculation to identify Volstagg as Volstagg seems reasonable for the purposes of this navbox. Immediately insisting that the people who were involved in Marvel IRL were involved in-universe is a textbook violation of T:NO RW though, imo. Najawin ☎  21:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Thefartydoctor, an in-universe connection is actually irrelevant to the placement of a navbox, which is an out-of-universe feature. There are hundreds of pages that follow this.
 * @Shambala108, oh, so you're going to be removing this template from nearly every page listed in the navbox? If not, that's extremely hypocritical. Epsilon  📯 📂 22:01, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Epsilon, that's just a blatant violation of T:POINT, C'mon. Najawin ☎  22:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No, it's not. I simply don't want a double standard to be enforced here. There is a difference. Epsilon  📯 📂 22:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)