Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of feature film series with two entries


 * 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 argument that the list fails WP:LISTN (for having no sources that discuss the notability of the set of films that have sequels) is far more compelling than the argument that the list has clear inclusion criteria (which is true, but doesn't matter if the grouping itself is indiscriminate or non-notable) or the argument that the list is a useful navigational tool (which is arguably not true, as any article on a notable film will surely link to its sequels).  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 05:58, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

List of feature film series with two entries

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Indiscriminate, just a list of (hypothetically) every film with a sequel. The other “list of film series by number of entries” articles should probably be bundle-nominated too. In fact, most “list of all series in medium X” articles are probably outdated and should be deleted in favor of categories. Dronebogus (talk) 22:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Dronebogus (talk) 22:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Dronebogus (talk) 22:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, essentially a list of sequels alongside their original. WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. Ajf773 (talk) 22:36, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no love for this list, but in the case of the other ones there are actually many notable film series articles that are listed there, I would not support deleting those, but maybe a major triming of non-notable series.★Trekker (talk) 22:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * [Sorry if you read the deleted comment, I misread you]. Dronebogus (talk) 22:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and WP:TRIVIA on a completely unsourced page. Vladimir.copic (talk) 03:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and one of the earliest edits to the page.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep or delete all articles named "List of feature film series with [number] entries". Christian75 (talk) 07:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually suggested that. Dronebogus (talk) 08:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep A list of movies and their sequels is not WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE but rather satisfies WP:LISTPURP -- this is an easy reference to (and sometimes the only way to learn of) a sequel. This also satisfies WP:CAT. -Tiredmeliorist (talk) 15:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You can easily learn of a sequel by looking up literally any movie on Wikipedia and seeing if the article mentions one. This list is only useful if you wanted to (in theory) see every notable film that has a sequel in one place, which is hypothetically WP:USEFUL to someone but in practice is largely devoid of practical use on top of being far too broad to realistically maintain. Dronebogus (talk) 00:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There are quite a number of movie sequels here that I would have never thought to look up. I'm sure I’m not alone. You might say that's WP:USEFUL but that does not preclude it being WP:LISTPURP -- they overlap quite a bit. Indeed, in order to be WP:5P1 an item must also be "useful" in some way. So saying it's WP:USEFUL is not really a rebuttal, it's just a warning that one needs to "explain why it's useful" rather than rely on simple utility to pass WP:NOTE. And this article does just that, as my original post demonstrated. -Tiredmeliorist (talk) 21:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Clear inclusion criteria, valid navigational link. Keep all the other Category:Lists of film series as well.  The nominator once again makes the case he wants to destroy list articles in favor of categories.  As explained before in other AFDs he started, that is not a valid reason to delete something.  WP:NOTDUPE states Furthermore, arguing that a category duplicates a list (or vice versa) at a deletion discussion is not a valid reason for deletion.   D r e a m Focus  07:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per Categories, lists, and navigation templates, lists and categories neither conflict with each other, duplicate each other, nor should one be considered more valuable/useable over the other. As a reader of Wikipedia, I prefer lists. As an editor, I can see why someone might think lists are harder to maintain. However there is no guarantee that categories are more complete than lists. Let those who want to maintain this list do so; otherwise ignore it. Platonk (talk) 16:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete obviously fails WP:LISTN (there is no source discussing feature film series with two entries as being a notable/significant group); and I fail to see what navigational purpose is achieved by specifically grouping film series by number of entries, and making it into a list. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:06, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, as it has clearly defined criteriaJackattack1597 (talk) 16:17, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Whether the list is clearly defined is not a relevant criterion here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:29, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep not indiscriminate, and is a valid navigation and information list LISTPURP. Lightburst (talk) 19:20, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete (disclosure: here from ANI) Clearly INDISCRIMINATE: I can't imagine this in an actual encyclopedia. Useless for navigation; as said above, movie articles link to their sequels, and that's all that's necessary. Enterprisey (talk!) 22:17, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tone 07:37, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep This is obviously part of a set – see the nav box (right). It therefore makes no sense to consider this entry in isolation.  Movies series are highly notable as entire books are written about them such as The Great Movie Series and the Encyclopedia of Film Themes, Settings and Series.  We naturally need indexes for all this material and so the topic passes WP:CLN; WP:LISTPURP; WP:LISTN and WP:NOTDUPE. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:43, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Indiscriminate. Unlikely to be a useful source for navigation. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per NLIST. First off, two do not make a "series". There are lists of film sequels ("35 Sequels Better Than the Original Movie" [Time magazine], "The Greatest Movie Sequels" [Empire magazine]), but they're not restricted to one and only one sequel. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:08, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete NLIST...and also the fact that quite a few of the 'sequels' on this list did not have original casts or writers involved and were filmed by the studio for crass cash-ins, or have many more than two films.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Um, that's WP:IDONTLIKE to its core, lol. I mean, I hear you, but a sequel is a sequel regardless how terrible it is. For example, Fast Five was a big reboot, but still counts. Also, making a list with the criteria you are talking about would probably be WP:OR. -Tiredmeliorist (talk) 00:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes but many more than two films is a legitimate point, admittedly more one for cleanup. Dronebogus (talk) 10:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment Andrew provided tangible proof to the articles importance regarding WP:LISTPURP (witness the exquisite navbar to your right). This list fulfills many uses, least not WP:LISTN, which says articles that fulfil informational, navigational, or developmental purposes should be kept "regardless of any demonstrated notability." This page could have cascading effects on other lists, so hard to say it's not navigational. -Tiredmeliorist (talk) 00:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Reply. That infobox navbar is made by someone here, so real-world notability isn't proven by that. Most people do not consider two films a series. For example, film historian Tim Dirks' glossary entry for "series" states, "the term also applies to feature films with more than one sequel; contrast with serials and sequels" (bolding mine). Heck, the infobox navbar even implicitly acknowledges that by putting Sequel in the Related category. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per Dream Focus. -GorgonaJS (talk) 13:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Duplicate already existing stuff.Slatersteven (talk) 16:06, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Purely indiscriminate list with no clear reason for its existence from an encyclopedic standpoint. It's heavily debatable whether having a sequel marks something as a "series" in the first place, making the article subjective.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:57, 3 November 2021 (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.