Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disney franchises


 * 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   keep. ‑Scottywong | babble _ 22:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Disney franchises
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

These franchise articles are just simply an amalgamation or existing articles and other releases related to the topic without any indication of notability of the "franchise" themselves or backed up by independent coverage in reliable sources. Existing navboxes appear to serve a better purpose than these simplified summaries. The narrow focus of these to Disney for much broader topics such as Hercules and Tarzan makes one think these are just promotional venues for Disney and definitely creates some ambiguity over those creations/characters as a whole. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

To add context to this discussion, these are the other franchise articles for Walt Disney Animation Studios films (plus the Pixar ones):--Coin945 (talk) 13:35, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

• Snow White (franchise) (1937-present)

• Fantasia (franchise) (1940-present)

• Cinderella (Disney franchise)‎ (1950-present)

• Alice in Wonderland (franchise) (1951-present)

• One Hundred and One Dalmatians (franchise) (1961-now)

• The Jungle Book (Disney franchise) (1967-present)

• Winnie the Pooh (Disney franchise) (1977-present)

• The Little Mermaid (franchise) (1989-present)

• Beauty and the Beast (franchise) (1991-present)

• Aladdin (Disney franchise) (1992-present)

• The Lion King (franchise) (1994-present)

• Pocahontas (franchise) (1995-present)

• The Hunchback of Notre Dame (franchise) (1996-present)

• Hercules (franchise) (1997-present)

• Mulan (franchise) (1998-present)

• Tarzan (franchise) (1999-present)

• The Emperor's New Groove (franchise) (2000-present)

• Atlantis (Disney franchise) (2001-present)

• Lilo & Stitch (franchise) (2002-present)

• Brother Bear (franchise) (2003-present)

• Frozen (franchise) (2013-present)

• Toy Story (franchise) (Pixar)

• Monsters, Inc. (franchise) (Pixar)

• Finding Nemo (franchise) (Pixar)

• Cars (franchise) (Pixar)


 * Note that 3 of these don't exist and 1, The Emperor's New Groove (franchise), was deleted following an AfD. Also note that the author of these articles is not !voting to keep them but just informing the community that other stuff exists. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Whoops thanks for reminding me. I'll cross it out. When it comes to something like this, OtherStuffExists is an essential concept to ascribe to. These are essentially the exact same articles on diffrent Disney franchises. We have to compare them and examine the context of the franchises. Are some more notable than others? Is there a template that the articles should follow? Etc.--Coin945 (talk) 22:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no concept of something being more notable than something else on Wikipedia. It's either notable or not based on WP:N and each judged on its own merits. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Quick fix: The assertion that "The narrow focus of these..." can easily be fixed by renaming the articles Disney's Hercules (franchise) and Disney's Tarzan (franchise) etc.--Coin945 (talk) 22:33, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Really doesn't help ascertain the notability of either franchise. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It clarifies the assertion that they are simply "promotional venues for Disney" by trying to claim credit for the intellectual property, showing that it is indeed a franchise based off someone else's work.--Coin945 (talk) 22:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * And I thought it was self-evident that pretty much every film within the official Disney canon has been turned into a multimedia franchise.--Coin945 (talk) 22:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * But these articles do not assert the notability of the individual franchises at all. Where are the sources which discuss the franchise of each as a whole (not just specific parts like a ride at Disney World). -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 23:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Frozen (franchise), The Lion King (franchise), and Toy Story (franchise) serve as idyllic templates for the sorts of articles. Just because sources aren't in the others atm, it doesn't mean they don't exist.--Coin945 (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: Copyright violations created through copying information from other Wikipedia articles is being fixed up. Thanks .--Coin945 (talk) 23:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅--Coin945 (talk) 00:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - I think the articles should be kept, because they are the only articles that include all of the media related to the original Disney movies in one place. These main franchise articles give a decent summary by type of media, year released, links to existing articles and redlinks for articles that could be created.  The articles are similar to a "List of media related to XX movie", and thus do not need to be notable in and of themselves. Jllm06 (talk) 01:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you be a little more specific as I do not find any articles titled "List of media related to Foo" to which you refer? -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 05:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The exact phrasing may be different, but here: List of Doraemon media, List of Bionicle media, List of Chocobo media, List of 24 media, List of Saw media, List of Tintin media, List of RahXephon media, List of The Flintstones media, List of Who Framed Roger Rabbit media. It seems to often be used as an alternative to the (franchise) verison. Though it is true that many media have articles on both, with the former being a list and the latter being prose. Then there is Batman franchise media, cos Batman.--Coin945 (talk) 05:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * If only you put as much effort in creating articles as you do in defending them. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 06:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per meeting WP:LISTPURP and WP:SALAT. There has been long-standing consensus to have and maintain lists of notable topics (themselves adequately notable and sourced) and I see no reason to reverse that consensus here.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 11:34, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note At the moment they are lists, but the goal is for each of them to be along the lines of Frozen (franchise), The Lion King (franchise), or Toy Story (franchise). I've gone about creating good skeletons for those franchise articles. Just because the sources and prose aren't there atm, it doesn't mean they don't exist.--Coin945 (talk) 18:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Renaming
If it is decided they should be kept, the new naming scheme should be decided. Do you prefer Disney's Tarzan (franchise) or Tarzan (Disney franchise)?--Coin945 (talk) 13:29, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


 * If non-controversial, that would be an issue for regular editing.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 13:38, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


 * For works based on existing sources, like Tarzan, Winnie the Pooh, Peter Pan, etc., then I think Tarzan (Disney franchise) is preferable, so as to better match up with the original source. Jllm06 (talk) 00:09, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

The Emperor's New Groove (franchise) (2000-present)
This article was deleted before this discussion occured. The only votes were:
 * Delete Sigh, really not notable.Forbidden User (talk) 1:54 am, 17 August 2014, Sunday (17 days ago) (UTC+8)
 * Keep this very good movie for watching — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.200.131.145 (talk) 4:58 pm, 27 August 2014, last Wednesday (6 days ago) (UTC+8)

Now that we are discussing these franchises, I think it is worth bringing this article to the table as well. There are franchise articles to be made on newer ones like Atlantis (Disney franchise) (2001-present) and Brother Bear (franchise) (2003-present), and for the sake of completeness, it would be nice to have Emperor back too.--Coin945 (talk) 16:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Brother Bear is a Disney franchise that commenced is a theatrical release of after the film was Walt Disney Animation Studios 44th' animated feature Brother Bear and its direct-to-video sequel Brother Bear 2. Rutt and Tuke is the tetragonists of Disney's 2003 theatrical animated film and the tetartagonits of its direct-to-video sequel. Kenai, Koda and Tug is the protagonists and deteragonist of two Brother Bear theatrical and direct-to-video films. Michael Badman served as the supervising animator Rutt and Tuke, Adam Murphy served as the supervising animator for Kenai, Noel Cleary served as the supervising animator for Koda.


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note to admins. I had someone contest the deletion for The Emperor's New Groove (franchise) at WP:REFUND (User:Coin945) and since User:Sandstein closed it as a WP:PROD deletion, I've restored it. I'd say that this should be either added to this or put into another AfD, depending on how this one closes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Normally this would have to go through DRV, but the mention of it being a PROD causes it to technically fall under REFUND's gates. I'm willing to send this to DRV if anyone contests this. If so, I'll list it, make a note at REFUND, but leave the article up for DRV to look over while its under consideration. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep all Articles that list all the notable films and books and whatnot over decades, show that is a notable franchise, because of how many notable things were part of it. You don't need the words "list of" at the front of an article's name, to be a list article.   D r e a m Focus  09:19, 13 September 2014 (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.