Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knives Out (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 Draftify. Joyous! Noise! 03:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Knives Out (film series)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Only just moved to mainspace as submitted to AfC by IP who didn't previously edit the page. Fails MOS:FILMSERIES as only two notable entries in series so far. Indagate (talk) 09:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Indagate (talk) 09:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per SKCRIT #1, no deletion rationale advanced. MOS are not grounds for deletion; they are rather best known methods on how we present information. A deletion nomination referencing an MOS is a tacit admission that the information should be kept... just not like this. Likewise, move of AFC to mainspace is not a deletion criterion per se, but may indicate that other deletion criteria might apply; the nom makes no such argument. Jclemens (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No policy/guideline based reason to keep. When MOS says article shouldn't exist, that's a reason to draftify it. The article has potential, just not yet, it's WP:TOOSOON. A WP:SUMMARY style article of the series is not needed when only three notable entries. Note on AfC move is a note on context, not reason to delete, draft shouldn't have been moved to mainspace without consulting main editors of the draft. Indagate (talk) 12:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not how this works: you have the obligation to advance a policy-based rationale for deleting the article; the reason to keep something is that such an argument hasn't been advanced. You still haven't advanced one. MOS doesn't have the scope to say something should or should not exist, just like deletion guidelines don't tell us whether something can have an infobox or not. MOS'es are indeed generally relied upon... but not for deletion discussions, because that's outside their remit. As far as re-draftifying? That's entirely reasonable but it's not a delete outcome. So why are we here? Jclemens (talk) 02:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Just move it back to draftspace and redirect the space to Knives Out until the third film comes out.★Trekker (talk) 13:17, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but thought should go through this process to get it moved to draftspace as accepted by an AfC reviewer. Indagate (talk) 13:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Draftify per WP:FILMSERIES and WP:TOOSOON. This is way too early for an article, and the MoS is an established guideline with broad community consensus. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Rian Johnson. Two films don't make a series, particularly if only one character is continued through them all, but talking about the films in context of Rian Johnson seems very natural. Most of the content would not carry like the cast/crew table. --M asem (t) 18:06, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with InfiniteNexus that this is too soon. It may be an article worth creating down the road, but it's not time yet. I also believe that when/if that time comes it will not be called a Knives Out film series. Nemov (talk) 20:00, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Move it back to draft space. No need to delete the article. -- Zoo (talk) 20:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify; I accepted the article because MOS:FILMSERIES only states that an article should be created when the series encompasses at least three films, but doesn't explicitly state that those films need to be released -- perhaps that should be changed to make it clearer. Since the third film is already in development, it can be moved back to draft until it satisfies MOS:FILMSERIES. &mdash; Ingenuity (talk &bull; contribs) 15:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If a film hasn't been released, or even entered production, it doesn't exist yet. In Hollywood, sequels can get canceled, delayed, reworked, put on hold, sent to development hell, rebooted, etc. at any given moment. That's why it's important that we wait until we are absolutely certain this is a full-fledged series (and not just a two-film thing) notable for its own article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Draft: Though film number 3 is currently in development, it is not yet filming. While that will likely happen sooner than later, this article was moved to the mainspace a bit too soon.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * when I first started the draft for this article, the title of Knives Out film series was used as a placeholder. Instead of deleting the article permanently - this should be moved back to a draft, and should Rian Johnson choose a different name for the series, we can change the name of the article at that point.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Draftify WP:TOOSOON atleast until the third film is released -- Megan B....  It’s all coming to me till the end of time  14:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify: I agree with people who say Draftify and people who say Draft. Please move the article back to the draftspace. 2607:FEA8:761B:C900:DD58:7E08:970D:1FA3 (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftiy per above. Far too soon as there are only two films. Some contents can be applied to Rian Johnson's article where applicable. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:20, 16 March 2023 (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.