Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iron Man franchise

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2013 April 15.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 merge to Iron Man in other media. J04n(talk page) 15:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)~~[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 April 15, the result has been overturned to no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Man franchise

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is a WP:CONTENTFORK from Marvel Cinematic Universe, combined with a lot of info reproduced from the production sections of the articles Iron Man (film), Iron Man 2, and Iron Man 3. It is all redundant material. Fandraltastic (talk) 00:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion with a redirect to Iron Man in other media. First of all, it doesn't seem to be really about the franchise, it seems to be about one particular sequence of films in the franchise with the development section virtually copied verbatim from Iron Man (film)#Development, Iron Man 2#Development and Iron Man 3#Development. It's a totally redundant article: it is unnecessary to reproduce all the details from the film articles, and the films are already covered collectively within the context of the Marvel series at Marvel Cinematic Universe and within the context of the Iron Man franchise at Iron Man in other media. Betty Logan (talk) 01:53, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. FallingGravity (talk) 08:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:CONTENTFORK states "If the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article." Merger is not achieved by deletion. The title Iron Man franchise seems a more plausible search phrase for the topic than Marvel Cinematic Universe and would better cover non-cinematic aspects of Iron Man. Warden (talk) 12:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Man in other media already covers non-cinematic aspects of Iron Man, while the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the correct title for Marvel's series of films as per COMMONNAME. Iron Man franchise would encompass everything from the comics to the films to video games, so is not a suitable title for any of the articles as they stand. All the content has been copied from other articles, so there is nothing to merge back. Betty Logan (talk) 13:04, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Whilst there may in the future be merit in discussing the three Iron Man films in their own right in an "Iron Man (film series)" article, there is nothing here that isn't better covered elsewhere, and content is best suited to Marvel Cinematic Universe. --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to ~~Iron Man (film series)~~ Iron Man in film and refine the scope to focus on aggregated content across the three films (basically dropping or simplifying "Development" as too detailed for this scope). I would relegate "Crossovers" to a simpler section (no sub-section headings) at the end of the article. The "Cast and characters" and "Reception" sections are standard sections for a film series article. I would also drop the film infobox from the article; it was never designed to accommodate film series articles. Its use here is painful to look at. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The aggregated content (development, cast and characters and reception) is already included over at Marvel Cinematic Universe, in the context of the wider film series. This article is essentially the equivalent of making a "Star Wars prequel trilogy" or "Daniel Craig James Bond film series" page - splitting out a portion of a wider film series article, where there doesn't seem to be enough content to make it anything other than a retread. -Fandraltastic (talk) 20:53, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is worth having different scopes, and I think that it is possible to have this Iron Man-centric scope. Actually, instead of Iron Man (film series), we could do Iron Man in film, which would more adequately capture the "Crossovers" section and still focus on the character. I think that these films are a delineated strand in the tapestry of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. For example, critics reviewed Iron Man 2 and compared it to Iron Man. They'll likely compare Iron Man 3 to its predecessors. In addition, we should consider critical analysis of multiple films (in the academic sense). For example, I found this, Fantasy Film Post 9/11, with the chapter "Wounding, morality and torture: Reflections of the War on Terror in Iron Man and Iron Man 2". This makes sense because the Iron Man films have recurring themes regarding terrorism and military technology, and this kind of article would be a good place to put it, especially if the aforementioned chapter analyzes both films together. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that we can and should allow different scopes, but the Iron Man-centric scope is already covered in Iron Man in other media, just without the review/box office/cast tables as those already exist in the Marvel Cinematic Universe page. It's true that the in other media article currently has no critical discussion of the films, but it very well could, it would just need to be added by anyone so inclined. If that section became too long, not because of material reproduced from elsewhere (like the article we are discussing now) but because of new content, critical or otherwise, relevant to those films as a series, then I could see and support an Iron Man in film article. But I don't think we are at that point, and I don't think we will be anytime soon. -Fandraltastic (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot say what work would actually be done on an article that focused on Iron Man in film, but I believe the topic is notable enough to be stand-alone. Unlike the other categories at Iron Man in other media, I see a relationship between the films that warrants its own space. I think you are arguing against redundancy, which is a valid case to make, but I think this particular focus is beneficial. Comparisons have been made and will be made between the Iron Man films in reviews, box office analyses, and academic discourse. I think greater detail can be achieved in an established type of article (film series/in film) that would otherwise be drowned out at Marvel Cinematic Universe. Subsequent Iron Man films are being made because of the blockbuster success of this set of films. They didn't go from The Avengers straight to The Avengers 2; they're obviously going back to this series. Lastly, I think that "Iron Man in other media" is merely a list of media appearances (heck, just saw that the lead sentence says that) which I think constricts contextual growth, which is what this topic needs. To me, it's worth creating the space (because of the interrelated outside coverage I've mentioned) and going from there. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's any sort of guideline about a list not being contextually deep, or being prose-free. In fact, I would think that a few paragraphs about the overriding themes and reception of the films would be extremely helpful to the Iron Man in other media article, and would make for a more useful article. And my concern is that an Iron Man in film article would be a plot blurp from each film and smaller versions of the tables from Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is what the article consists of now, and then maybe a few sentences on the themes of the film series. And I don't see that necessitating a standalone article at this time. I agree that it may be notable, but I don't think we should be spinning out articles until we actually have the material that calls for it. Just my two cents, cheers. -Fandraltastic (talk) 01:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - serious WP:CONTENTFORK issue, should be merged to Iron Man (film series) per Erik. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:27, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Your own argument for a merge would not call for a deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a time-has-finally-come article and WP:MOVE to title to either Iron Man (film series) or Iron Man in film as per Erik. While certainly the franchise films can and will be mentioned elsewhere (such as within the entire franchise of comic books, animations, and toys AND films being discussed at Iron Man in other media or Marvel Cinematic Universe), that does not somehow mean we cannot discuss the Iron Man films in a separate article as a viable and now-proper content fork. We're building an encyclopedia folks, and a merge does not serve the project nor its readers. Erik's analysis is spot on. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If the consensus is for the information to stay, I feel that the article should be moved with Iron Man (film series) as well. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Iron Man in film. The current scope is redundant to Marvel Cinematic Universe. However a larger scope will allow for more content such as the animated films and separate it from the Marvel Cinematic Universe article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of information about the franchise beyond the films. Not sure how you'd work those into the film article. Mkdw ^talk 00:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We already have Iron Man in other media.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:00, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Material is already covered in articles Iron Man in other media and Marvel Cinematic Universe. Richiekim (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Educational and good resource, covered significantly in secondary sources. — Cirt (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The title is a bit of a misnomer, which should actually point to Iron Man in other media. The content however, as it covers the Iron Man film series, should have its page moved to either of its current redirects Iron Man (film series) or Iron Man in film. Marvel Cinematic Universe covers the entire Marvel film series, of which Iron Man is a notable part of, but I think this is a valid content fork in its own right as discussed in WP:RELART. The page could do with quite a bit of improvement, like Erik suggests, but I don't think that a poorly composed page is a valid reason for deletion. Funny ^Pika! 14:33, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RELART is definitely a useful read. I think this passage applies here: "Another example [of articles not being part of a content fork] is where two articles cover the same topic, but are clearly directed at different audiences." Erik (talk | contribs) 13:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move as per the other proposals, to Iron Man (film series) or Iron Man in film as those would be more appropriate titles. To keep the article with its current name would require a lot more editing to change the nature of the article. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of information about the franchise beyond the films. Not sure how you'd work those into the film articles. Mkdw ^talk 00:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article needs a lot of work, but the concept of a prose form of Iron Man in other media that would talk about the franchise itself is not uncommon and, in my opinion, does not seem close to CONTENTFORK of Marvel Cinematic Universe; "A content fork is the creation of multiple separate articles all treating the same subject." The two are completely separate subjects. One is about the Iron Man franchise, the other is about every single Marvel film. Mkdw ^talk 00:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The editor who created this article intended it to be about the film franchise; the very first version confirms this. It might have been named "franchise" instead of "film series" due to the crossovers, but I think "Iron Man in film" is the proper scope since it is not so license-based. As for an article about the overall franchise, I am not sure if Iron Man has received that kind of overall attention like Superman and Batman have. I'm okay with Iron Man in other media as a list article; I just find the film portion of his appearances more unifying than other aspects. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any unduplicated material with Iron Man in other media per WP:CONTENTFORK. Miniapolis 14:04, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.