Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Batman (1989–1997 film series)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Batman in film. Clear consensus not to have an article per WP:CFORK. Unclear whether to delete, merge or redirect. The redirect is a compromise, allowing mergers if anybody wants to.  Sandstein  09:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Batman (1989–1997 film series)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Should be redirected to the superior Batman in film article. WP:CONTENTFORK that should never have been created in the first place. Fair support for this option during a recent recent rm: Talk:Batman (1989–1997 film series). Rob Sinden (talk) 10:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:11, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete As per nom. The article at present contains very little content that isn't present in either Batman in film or the individual film articles and there is very little evidence that sources identify this set of films as being a 'series' in itself. Scribolt (talk) 11:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's any doubt that the four films in question form a discrete series, it's just that the topic is better covered elsewhere. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You're right, the key point is the content fork (hence as per nom). But even though they have in-universe continuity, the four films aren't always described as a discrete series; there's much more variance in the sources (the Burton Films, the Keaton films, the Schumacher films) unlike the Dark Knight Trilogy which has a well defined and recognised identity as a 'series'. This strengthens the delete rationale imo because there's less of a case for a standalone article on this set of films to exist at all (I think, anyway. I'll let more experienced people decide if I'm misunderstood the issues). Scribolt (talk) 12:15, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete, due to being a content fork. These films are already covered at the Batman in film article.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:58, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The split was apparently done in the second version of the page, claiming authority from Talk:Batman_in_film. Invite User:S Marshall the RfC closer to comment, again.  I think that having three levels of articles: (1) Articles on each film; (2) Articles on sets of films; and (3) an article on all the films, is too much, and that (2) is the one to go.  (3) might use some trimming.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The split was made with the consensus that Batman in film shouldn't be significantly changed, and was supposed to facilitate expansion of the Batman (1989–1997 film series). I brought it up after nothing had been improved a few months after the split.  Three years later, and this still hasn't been expanded.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:09, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep for good summary collocation of unique stylistic elements to this series, or redirect. Hyperbolick (talk) 13:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 13:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect/Delete All the content at this article is already covered at Batman in film and List of Batman films cast members. I don't really see how Batman (1989–1997 film series) can evolve into a distinct article that simply doesn't replicate Batman in film. Trimming content from that article would make it less comprehensive in its overview of the franchise. Betty Logan (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect - Per Betty Logan. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:36, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong keep- ideally this should be a speedy procedural keep since the nominator is asking for redirection rather than deletion, and this is Articles for Deletion. But this series was a major media phenomenon, much like The Dark Knight Trilogy, for those who are old enough to have memories stretching back longer than 15 years. A merger can be a separate discussion, but AfD is absolutely, unequivocally wrong. Ribbet32 (talk) 23:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There is already so much overlap that a "merge" would basically equate to a "redirect" in this case. Betty Logan (talk) 00:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Neither a merge nor redirect is carried out via AfD and neither requires deletion. This is the completely wrong place. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Not really.  Or just no.  It is a request for Pseudo-deletion by redirection.  These are common at AfD, always have been, and a consensus anywhere is a consensus and is all that is required to do something.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Batman_in_film per above. The redirect should target the section, not the entire article since this section covers the film series in question. Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Batman in film per the above. That article already covers the topic better than this fork.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947 (c)  20:11, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per Betty's rationale.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, due to being a content fork, as above. Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.