Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sherlock Holmes (2009 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   delete. Big Dom  00:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Sherlock Holmes (2009 film series)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

One film and an unreleased sequel do not need their own article as a "series" Yaksar (let's chat) 20:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree that the article is not really needed, and gives the impression of fandom. However I can't really see a reason in policy that WP shouldn't have an article on the series, both films are notable enough. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * One film hasn't even been released yet, it's still in production. Technically there's no policy saying every film with an unreleased sequel shouldn't have it's own series article, but I'd really hope it's somewhat common sense.--Yaksar (let's chat) 21:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - 2 films does not "film series" make. A series would indicate more than just 2 films. After that, we have an issue with the title of the page. "2009 film series" indicates that the "series" all happens within 2009. That is not the case here. Given that this is an inaccurate title and there "will be" only 2 films in this "series", there is no need for this page.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree this should be deleted, but article title is correct as per WP:NCF. --Rob Sinden (talk) 14:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: No need for a series article when the "series" consists of only 2 films (really only 1, as the sequel is still in production). Absolutely nothing to say that isn't said better in the film articles. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:59, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * delete Classic jumping the gun, two films is a duet not a series. WP:CRYSTAL may be applicable here as well.The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 22:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep It made hundreds of millions of dollars profit, so we can expect many sequels. No sense deleting something now only to have it recreated later on.  And there is no rule against how many films are necessary to call it a series.  We have an article on Sherlock Holmes (1939 film series) so I suppose mentioning the year the first film came out is the thing to do.   D r e a m Focus  23:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The 1939 series has 14 released films all part of one series. This has one released film and one in production. We can't just "expect" more sequels, as per WP:CRYSTALBALL.--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Secondly, it's not Superman (1978 film series), or Friday the 13th (1980 film franchise). As for no defined number for a "series"...maybe not on Wikipedia but that doesn't mean that we treat 2 films like they are part of a series of films. There are two of them. Not a series of them. In most common practice, a "series" is going to be 3 or more.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  01:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The dictionary defines series as "1a. a number of things or events of the same class coming one after another in spatial or temporal succession b: a set of regularly presented television programs each of which is complete in itself" I don't see any definition saying it has to be three.  Two would meet the requirements.   D r e a m Focus  22:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Swear to heaven, it's seeing votes like this that leads me to wonder whether certain members of the alleged "rescue squadron" just routinely vote Keep in bad faith because they don't have the support to abolish WP:Deletion policy outright. For pity's sake ... WP:CRYSTAL is a content policy.  It is not optional.  It's been part of the rules of the road of this encyclopedia for most of its history.  WP:V is a core content policy.  It is, in like fashion, not optional, and has been part of the rules of the road of this encyclopedia for all of its history.  (I presume folks didn't miss that there aren't any sources suggesting a full-blown series, and that there might be is pure unsupported speculation on the Keep voters' part.)  None of this is news.  Delete.   Ravenswing  18:27, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you see any Rescue tag on this article? Do you see anyone from the ARS other than me here?  They have one movie made and are making the next one.  See the definition of "series" above.   D r e a m Focus  22:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete makes sense to delete this as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. See WP:CRYSTAL. Creating this type of article prematurely tends to attract rumors or filler content. Better off re-creating this article when there is something reliable and substantial to say. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:CRYSTAL pretty clearly applies here. Even a film and a sequel doesn't really make a series. Douglasi (talk) 14:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I think it's fair to say that the consensus is that this shouldn't have been created in the first place. I'd treat this one like a guest who stopped by in March for the 2011 Christmas party, please come back when we have the tree up...  Mandsford 21:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete It can be recreated if it is warranted in the future. Millahnna (talk) 08:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Two films in a series does not warrant an article. --Rob Sinden (talk) 14:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete since two films (especially with the second still unreleased) is not enough for a film series article. Three released films, I think, is a reasonable threshold since it can truly aggregate figures like box office revenue or critics' scores. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 01:42, 12 March 2011 (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.