Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Batman Triumphant


 * 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 DELETE. The raw comment total is 8-5 Delete. But two of the Keep comments are a bit fishy: one by an editor who has made two other edits, one by an editor who has made one other edit, to Articles for deletion/The Dark Enforcer. If we discount those two, we have a raw total of 8-3 Delete (counting one Redirect comment as Delete). The argument that the non-production of the film is of some notability is well taken; this is not just somebody's fever dream, but a real event (by being a non-event) in the history of the Batman film franchise. On the other hand, no real claim was advanced that the Batman film series (as opposed to the individual films) and it's backstories and financial ins-and-outs is itself sufficiently notable that a non-produced film in the series must be notable. And WP:NOTFILM does specifically discourage articles on unproduced films except in special instances which are not really met here. So I don't see a really convincing Keep argument, and in the end, with an 8-3 raw vote total, I see a general consensus to delete. Herostratus 04:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Batman Triumphant
As the film never entered production and has no significant value to have its own article. This project is already mentioned in its own section in the Batman & Robin film article. --Erik 00:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep we have a category for cancelled and unfinished films; this one is part of the history of Batman in films. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Firstly, it is not a movie that would gain a good amount of attention; it is merely a sequel in a series. Sure, people would've seen it, but is it really so important and notable that even when canceled, it still deserves an article? Secondly, the two sources are merely speculation themselves - I don't think we should be basing articles on such things. WB has not released information about this canceled movie; fans have merely speculated on it. All in all, the mention at Batman & Robin (1997 film) is quite enough, I believe. Picaroon9288•talk 03:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Article needs a bit of cleanup, but is generally properly sourced, and while not of earth-shattering importance, does factually detail the failure of the Schumacher franchise, and it's demise. I found it interesting the first time I read it, because I hadn't actually found much about it before then. ThuranX 03:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable nough as an unfinished film. --Switch 11:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It is history as an unmade Batman movie. It tells the story of what could have been had the series gone on with Joel Shumacher(sp?) continued as director and what his next film would have been. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Walks4fun (talk • contribs).
 * Comment First of all, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. A film like this "should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place," which it never did.  Furthermore, WP:NOTFILM states that unreleased films are "generally not appropriate unless the production of the film is notable in some way."  Seeing that this film never even entered production, it can't even qualify for notability.  It's not even "unfinished", it was never started. If this article is kept, then it will be trimmed down substantially based on the speculative bits in the article.  There wasn't even a script treatment released about this supposed film -- how can anything be assumed about what takes place?  If this film article is kept, we may as well create film articles for other films that never got beyond pre-production.  As I've said, Batman Triumphant already has its own section in the Batman & Robin film article, and any information from this particular article should be adapted to fit that paragraph instead of having its own article. --Erik 21:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete absolutely non-notable, makes no claim of notability. AdamSmithee 07:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, completely non-notable and already mentioned in the appropriate article. Prolog 19:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, I agree with all the other Delete posts. Cbrown1023 02:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, being a Batman film is its only notority, and the information is too scant to warrent its own page. Plus, as previously said, it is already covered in its appropriate place.
 * Comment, Could this article not be turned into an article about all the other cancelled films between "& Robin" and "Begins" Like Canceled Superman films? Spencer &quot;The Belldog&quot; Bermudez |  (Complain here) 20:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The Canceled Superman films article seems pretty extensive since there were various people (such as screenwriters) attached at different points, but I'm not sure how valid of an article it really is. That's a debate in itself.  Batman Triumphant was one intended film (under one intended script, it seems), which does not make it very notable from that particular perspective.  The Batman & Robin article seems to contain the necessary information in its sequel section, though I'm sure it could be improved.  I don't know if there's been any other attempts to film a Batman movie after Batman & Robin and before Batman Begins, but that could be an article in itself if Cancelled Superman films exists.  That's a discussion for another day, though. --Erik 21:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Redirect to cancelled films article.--Peta 06:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete If the article had any sniff of reliable sources I would advocate keep in the interest of Batman History. However, with just fanzines as sources, I can't advocate keeping something that is essentially unverified speculation. Agne 19:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It's an interesting bit of Batman film history. Soundblaster619 17:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, maybe so, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a compendium of interesting film history that gives non-notable, cancelled movies their own fansite-sourced articles. To Soundblaster619 and all the other keepers, why can't this be covered right here? Picaroon9288 23:40, 13 September 2006 (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.