Talk:Daniels (directors)

Splitting proposal
Just wondering, should they have separate pages? Or at least separate life stories, including early years, in this one? Gah4 (talk) 03:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @Gah4: Since they are only notable as a duo, we only need one article. However, I agree there can be a section describing their early lives in this article once there is enough information in the personal lives section to warrant a split. Yee no   (talk) 04:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * They are now won academy award winners. This is going to get confusing, very fast, unless they are given separate pages. 99.247.203.34 (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The actual reason for asking is that there is no Early life section, though some is now added (since yesterday) in the Personal lives section. It is kind of nice having this combined page, but their earlier life is separate. Gah4 (talk) 01:27, 14 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes. Despite the fact, and even though, I have no idea who these guys are, so maybe wikipedians with more unbiased knowledge of them perhaps have more merit, as I am very picky with recent cinema, but that's irrelevant. Joint pages about artists, to my knowledge, are for music/bands/troupes/groups/performance ensembles etc., twins/triplets (identical siblings who share the same birthdate, and do the same projects together etc.), and that's about it offhand. If for whatever reason there was a consensus that I'm not not aware of, that neither director needs an individual article, then the article should just be about their production company, and listing them as the lead directors etc. Then again I know the Farrelly brothers have a joint article, but that's different, and I already explained twins/brothers/sisters/siblings that might get a joint article, that's another discussion. Nevertheless they won best directors at the Oscars recently, and both directors are not related, and also trivially from two polar completely different backgrounds, so they need separate articles most definitely. Bronoton (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Is there even enough content about their early lives to justify this move? Like is there enough information / reliable references to make a split? I think it should remain as is. They're a duo, period. That's why the categories exist. They work and create as a duo. They've won every single award as a duo. They credit themselves on the cover of their movies as Daniels. They're know in the public as the Daniels. Every single time they were thanked by their cast or crew in any awards speech, it was always as a duo (as the Daniels). Perhaps down the road the split may be justified, but for right now, it's not. There's not enough information and content about the only part of their lives that wasn't a partnership (their early lives) to justify a split. The article as-is isn't even that long. Until they start creating films separately, or stop using the Daniels moniker or stop being referred to that way, or when their life stories are better-known with more reliable sourcing on the matter, then why make this move? I know they're not siblings, but there's almost more reason to split the Coen brothers and Wachowskis' articles before splitting the Daniels' article. That's how closely tied their careers are together (so much that it's really just one career -- unlike the Coens and Wachowskis who have had separate professional roles on films and have even done some feature films separately). Even the only photo of them on wikipedia is of the both of them. It would be hard to find any photo in the general public at any conference or award ceremony where it's not them together. Articles like Matt Stone and Trey Parker for instance are a different scenario, because they've been in the public eye for so long, and even they don't work as synchronized as the Daniels (Trey has far more creative involvement in their projects than Matt does). ~ Flyedit32 (talk) 23:59, 15 March 2023
 * Bronoton, could you, please, elaborate as to why the case of having a single article for the Farrelly brothers is "different" from this one? Familial relationships are less important than creative ones, in this context. -The Gnome (talk) 12:07, 18 March 2023 (UTC)


 * There are plenty of articles on filmmaking duos who are not related, e.g. Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, etc. (see more at Category:Filmmaking duos). Both they themselves and reliable sources cover them as a duo and not individually and we follow how sources cover them. It's perfectly possible to cover their divergent early lives in one article. If one or both ever grow to become independently notable, they can be spun off when the sources justify it (e.g. Safdie brothers) but until then, this article should remain unsplit. Axem Titanium (talk) 12:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I would agree: Don't split yet. Keep the article on "Daniels" the duo. Maybe in future they'll each branch off into more individual careers, and a Wikipedia split would make sense, but right now they're so professionally intertwined that any split articles would pretty much just duplicate each other, content-wise. Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The two split articles would basically be identical save for birth dates and locations, and like 3 or 4 sentences from the 'personal lives' section, and that's it. I also agree that it's very doable and not at all uncommon to touch on the differences between their early and personal lives in one article, especially given the fact that it wouldn't be much weight as is (if those topics were covered heavily in this or any article, I'd think it'd be undue anyways). ~ Flyedit32 (talk) 16:37, 16 March 2023
 * Agreed. There is currently no good reason to split. We shouldn't split based on hypothetical future later divergences in the two directors' bios. Wolfdog (talk) 18:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Many articles have an Early life section. Seems to me that they deserve separate such sections, and could have a little more detail than the Personal Lives section. If this can be improved, as part of a combined article, then it is fine with me. Gah4 (talk) 09:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * They need separate articles. This is extremely confusing to read and honestly ridiculous. As has been mentioned before collective articles are reserved for music groups or performing troupes only. This is the first joint director article and it’s very easy to see why it has never been attempted before. 2600:8800:A592:4100:80FB:9331:C91B:3BAE (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's amazing how wrong that last response is. Not only is the current article not at all confusing to read (it's actually quite easy to understand and I'd assume the average wiki reader would agree - which I am), but there's also SO MANY duo director articles out there.... Category:Filmmaking duos.... And those are just the articles with the tagged category included, I'm sure there are even more out there without that cat. ~ Flyedit32 (talk) 16:02, 17 March 2023


 * Keep it in one as long as they're more notable as a creative duo than independently notable as individuals. Currently, and for the near future, it is quite evident that the former is true. -The Gnome (talk) 16:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I believe it should not be split because they only do things together, they have no solo works or anything. 60.242.13.134 (talk) 01:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * They have been together less than half their lives, and yet the Personal Lives section is three sentences each. I am not against a combined article, but it does need to properly explain their earlier lives, separately. Gah4 (talk) 07:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not much, if anything, about their respective private lives is notable, as far as sources are concerned. Beyond the typical stuff, e.g. family, hobbies, etc, there is not much worthy of inclusion. Which strengthens the reasoning for keeping the article focused on the duo, for the time being. -The Gnome (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Now that they have an Oscar, they are more notable, and so their whole lives are more notable. Maybe the sources will catch up. Gah4 (talk) 08:29, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that this is quite possible and that's why it is evidently more prudent for us to wait. -The Gnome (talk) 12:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: American Cinema History
— Assignment last updated by Hn0013 (talk) 17:19, 10 October 2023 (UTC)