Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the longest gaps between film sequels


 * 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. It sounds like it might be possible to write a new version of this, but it would need better sourcing and more objective inclusion criteria (which, in turn, would imply a new title). -- RoySmith (talk) 16:15, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

List of the longest gaps between film sequels

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This list is 100% original research. There are two sources cited in the article: One is the main page for an entertainment site (which may have said something about one of the films in question at some point in the past, but I cannot find anything relevant now. (The source is cited for the note that the entry on the list apparently should not be on the list: "Despite its title, the film is not a sequel to Aashiqui, and the only similarity is that 'both are music-based romantic films'.") The other discusses the Mary Poppins sequel, but does not mention the unusually large gap.

Searching the 'net, I find several sources discussing lengthy gaps between original and sequel (TRON, Blade Runner, Star Wars, etc.), but none claiming to be THE longest gap or a list of the longest gaps.

How do we know Bambi is the champ in this category? We don't. All we know is that someone added it here and no one has proposed anything with a longer gap.

Several of the films currently listed use spin-offs, prequels, made for TV and direct to video films. Several use "unofficial" sequels, such as the Wizard of Oz where the proposed sequel is not related to the original, the the book the second is based on is a sequel to the book the first is based on. Does that make "Raise the Titanic" a sequel to "A Night to Remember"?

With no source for determining what does and does not "count", I am left to wonder why a made for TV miniseries would count but a radio play, book, etc. wouldn't. If a TV show can be a sequel for a film, why isn't "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" a sequel to the original "Star Trek"?

Bottom line: Someone was intrigued by the idea that this article represents, but the sources simply do not exist to support an article. Sum mer PhD v2.0 21:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Long-delayed sequels are a notable topic. A list shouldn't be deleted just because the criteria are arguable or it may be hard to complete; these things can be debated or agreed through talk pages. And if you're worried about "longest" rename to "long". --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - You seem to be suggesting that this should be an entirely different article. The current article claims to list the "longest" gaps: a discrete claim. The article you suggest is altogether different, as a casual look at your suggested sources confirms. Your first source, "PAJBA" seems to be a blog: no "about" page, no copyright notice. Its claim of the "longest" gaps jumps all over our list 1, 7, 32, 31, 39, 62, 115, 70...
 * Your second source puts "The Best Man" first on its list. Ours has it at #162. Next is #132, 136, 96, 70...
 * Source #3 doesn't claim to list the "longest", giving a list of 6 "long delayed" sequels.
 * Source #4 is the "most absurd gaps". There third gap in this list of sequels is Star War VI to Star Wars I, a sixth degree prequel.
 * 5 doesn't give a list or claims of the "longest", but is an article about the concept of sequels after decades have passed.
 * The three of your sources give us a hodgepodge of long delayed sequels that we would probably package in a list format to make it look like a countdown of the longest, similar to if we change List of films considered the worst into List of films that weren't good or wrote List of businesses that made a lot of money.
 * There might be material to write about Long delayed film sequels, if we can resist the urge to claim we have created a definitive list. To the extent that reliable sources discuss prequels, made for TV and direct to video, we can do the same. We might even find sources tying the distant cousin films. We do not, however, have a verifiable list of the top ten (or 20, or 200...) longest gaps. We also don't have objective, sourced criteria for a list of long delays. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: I'm sympathetic to the nom here. This is a loosey-goosey definition very badly compromised by a near-complete lack of sources.  Who says that there weren't any "sequels" between Film X and film X2?  Define "sequel" -- do we include films in canon?  Fan films?  Have foreign sources been scoured?  Is a "film franchise" a unitary thing, and the sequel has to be made by the rights holder of the first film?  No ... I wouldn't even consider keeping such a list without 95%+ of the entries sourced, and it's more like 5%.   Nha Trang  Allons! 19:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The whole thing is too open to WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 20:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Just improve sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.129.128.40 (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - There don't seem to be reliable sources for a list like this. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep All it needs is strong criteria and maybe a name change. It appears to now use 10 years as the length. What counts as a "sequel", (Note, the lead does not use the term sequel, but "consecutive installments of a film franchise".) I think the list needs to be parred down. Most of the tv shows removed. If it is film franchise, the "films" should have either had a cinematic release or was shot with the intent to have a release. As for citations, all that is needed is to prove: the two films are in a franchise, there is no other film entry between them, when they were released, and they are films. Zginder 2017-09-01T07:11:57Z
 * Comment - List of films produced with the intention to release them in theaters that are part of a franchise with no film in between them with a gap of 10 or more years is the reason we don't have List of United States legislators who are part of a family with a gap of 50 or more years between legislators. While we might have a source saying that Billy Smith is the first member of Congress in his family since his great-great-grandfather in 1840, we don't have sources discussing the topic. It might be worth including in the article about Billy, but we don't have sourced criteria for a list. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:53, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not proposing we use a title like that. Many lists and articles are titled slightly wrong because, it a title that will get more searches. I think something along the lines of "List of long gaps between film sequels". Notice sequel includes the usage of a prequel or other film in a franchise. Zginder 2017-09-02T02:34:13Z
 * The point: We do not have any sources discussing films produced with the intention to release them in theaters that are part of a franchise with no film in between them with a gap of 10 or more years. We have a handful of sources discussing "long gaps" between sequels. That their varying criteria are is not explained anywhere is not an invitation for us to create our own. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:09, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * We only need sources for the dates of the films release, which for most of them is the same place. Zginder 2017-09-03T11:09:06Z
 * List of tallest buildings and structures is encyclopedic and backed by reliable sources stating which structures are the tallest. This article currently aspires to mirror that, but fails as the sources simply do not exist. List of tall buildings and structures does not exist because "tall" is a vague, relative term (in my neighborhood 5 stories would be very tall, while it would be tiny in Manhattan). Dumping this article and starting a new List of films with long gaps between sequels echos that problem and invites us to create a topic out of thin air: 5, 10, 15 years? Sequels, prequels, spinoffs, soft-reboots, alternate universes? Theatrical release, direct-to-video, made for TV film/miniseries/series? Take your pick from each list and tell me why that version of the list is encyclopedic while other variations of the list are not. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:47, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, most of the lists in List of tallest buildings and structures appear to be mostly or completely unsourced. Yes, there is an official body, but the Wikipedia entry goes way beyond the "official" lists. Zginder 2017-09-08T08:04:14Z

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Are there any thoughts about how this list fits within our policies on lists?

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Malinaccier ( talk ) 14:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:SYNTH. The concept of "sequel" here is hazy, subjective, and open to interpretation, for example Cinderella II is a direct to video movie with not nearly the same impact as the original Cinderella continues to have. Therefore this list doesn't have much encyclopedic value.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * But is the concept of sequel possible. I think it is. This list needs love not deletion! Zginder 2017-09-08T07:33:17Z
 * I have removed all the direct to video and TV movies from the page. It seems to be the one thing that everyone for deleting and keeping agrees on. Zginder 2017-09-10T03:05:25Z
 * Delete As per Zxcvbnm; SYNTH and LISTCRUFT. A simple "list of sequels made over 40 years after the original movie" would be better, but is unlikely to be notable either. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Compiling facts and information is not original research. It is what an encyclopedia is. Zginder 2017-09-08T07:41:07Z
 * I came here thinking I would likely vote to keep this, but delete. Possibly merge some discussion of the longest gaps into Sequel, but only if they are well-sourced. bd2412  T 02:42, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you provide detail as to your reasoning?Zginder 2017-09-08T07:41:07Z
 * I do not find that the article demonstrates the proposition that the existence of a really long gap between sequels is a notable thing to document. A ten, twelve, fifteen year gap doesn't seem all that noteworthy, and there are no sources provided to explain what is considered to be a "long" gap; many of the entries are at least problematic. Also, is a story with a different set of characters set in the same fictional universe a "sequel"? Is a prequel a sequel? Is Superman Returns, with a completely different cast playing the same characters, properly called a "sequel" to Superman IV? There is no basis presented in reliable sources for delineating a list. bd2412  T 02:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * As referenced early in the discussion and in the article lead, the word, "sequel", is not to be taken literally. It is shorthand for any additional film to a franchise except for remakes. I would also like to remind you that just because there are some questionable entries does not make the list deletable. If you have a problem with a listing, then remove it or bring it up on the talk page. Zginder 2017-09-13T06:50:12Z
 * As also referenced earlier in the discussion, maybe the word should be taken literally. Or not. Or somewhere in between. Maybe we should include TV series and/or books/comics and/or miniseries and/or direct to video. Since no reliable sources discuss criteria, maybe anything goes. If you think Gravity is a sequel to Speed 2: Cruise Control, maybe we can create criteria that would allow that. You are suggesting we create a topic for which there are no reliable third-party sources. Having thus fully discarded WP:N and WP:V, we might as well create "List of yucky vegetables". - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Personally I think some editors are overthinking it, and sources are not required (Its a list, go to the film's page and look at the date), but I do fail to see why this particular list should be included in an encyclopedia. L3X1 (distænt write)  12:50, 13 September 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.