Talk:List of box office records set by Avengers: Infinity War

Move to draftspace

Per the discussion held at Talk:Avengers: Infinity War, (perma link here), it has been decided that this content is best suited to be crafted in the draft space. At such a time, if at all, this content passes all notability requirements, a new discussion should be held in support of it moving back to the mainspace, for all to weigh in. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Expand this article to MCU box office records

What sort of entries would other MCU movies get? Nergaal (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I fear such a change would result in a terribly cluttered and hard-to-navigate list that would give the reader no comprehensive overview of the subject. I also think it would set a bad precedent that would encourage editors to so-to-speak WP:PROMOte their favourite franchise by gathering disparate records in one place to artificially inflate its apparent prominence in the field. TompaDompa (talk) 22:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Besides MCU and SW, there are at most 3 franchises (Potter's, LotR, and Bond) that have been near breaking record levels. 5 franchise BO records is not the worst kind of forking I've seen on this site. Nergaal (talk) 08:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Anyways, in the end, this particular list might never turn out long enough to truly merit its own article, and I would rather have a list with all than have a list that is AfDed at first chance. Nergaal (talk) 08:10, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Achievements

Moving this section here as it's WP:OFFTOPIC; these aren't box office records. TompaDompa (talk) 21:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

• In its second weekend, it remained the top earner among Western releases in every market where it played.
• Sixth Marvel movie and 17th Disney movie to reach 1 billion worldwide.

References

No consensus is not valid reason to deny a move

I argue against User:Brojam 's unilateral revert of the move by the user User:Nergaal. Brojam, why not let it have a trial by fire vs trying to muffle it without a concern. Records by Avengers Infinity War have been the subject of numerous well documented reliable sources which elaborate on Infinity War's broken records. Consensus made at the Infinity War's talk page cannot override wider community consensus at said Articles for Deletion. If you feel so strongly that there is no consensus for it to be an article, then again let the wider community decide that by moving the article to name space, and if you're so determined, nominating for deletion. Tutelary (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Have a look at the first section on this talk page, where it states that it was decided that the article should remain in the draft space and that a new discussion should be held to move it to the mainspace, which Nergaal failed to do, hence my "no consensus" revert. Also, yes Avengers: Infinity War broke many records but it's not like the film's article itself doesn't mention many of these already. - Brojam (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Again, WP:CONLIMITED. There should also be an actual reason to deny the move vs "no consensus". No consensus is literally saying that you don't have an opposing reason, other than the fact that there hasn't been recent discussion to decide that it was the right thing to do. Revert your move, and nominate it for deletion if you like. Clearly there are some editors, including myself, that see it as a notable topic spurred on by reliable sources and their consistent discussion of records. Tutelary (talk) 00:07, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Brojam is correct. There is no wider community consensus, there is only the decision that led to the page being moved to the draft space. If you disagree with that decision or believe that there has been a change to the point that the article should be moved back then you need to start a new discussion, not pretend that the other one never happened and that it is up to others to prove why you are wrong. That's not how it works. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Admins are free to abuse their powers. But the consensus has been to wait until the article is developed. If that is something admins want to pretend that was not the consensus then good for them. Nergaal (talk) 16:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

No, the consensus was to build the article here in the hopes that it would pass notability and splitting guidelines, which I still believe it has not. The draft is still just the listification of the prose at the film's article, and that prose is no where near a level suggested by WP:SIZESPLIT to justify one. If you feel otherwise, I suggest starting a new discussion at the FILM's talk page (to get more eyes/editor input) stating your case as to why you believe this separate list is worth splitting off. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Just for clarification Nergaal, the users who commented on this draft and its potential move are not admins. I'll be looking into starting a requested move in the coming days if there's no other choice. Also, WP:SIZESPLIT decides whether or not large articles should be split up, and has no bearing upon a different article albeit on a similar topic. Perhaps the term you are looking for is WP:POVFORK. But even if this article was 5x longer, it's not a POV fork by any measure. Per WP:SPINOFF, Articles where the expanding volume of an individual section creates an undue weight problem, and I believe that not wanting to put all the records of the movie into the parent article is understandable. But that doesn't make those records any less notable. Tutelary (talk) 18:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

No I meant WP:SIZESPLIT. This would be a split of content from Avengers: Infinity War. If this were to exist in the mainspace, we wouldn't still keep the content at that article, because this is just listifying the same content that is currently prose without any other info, so it's a split. And as stated, the overall readable prose size of this content as it currently stands (not even 1 kB) does not justify the split. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, this wouldn't be a WP:POVFORK because how the same content is present (list vs prose) is not a difference of point of view. This technically, at the moment is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. The records in the film article is also not presenting a undue weight problem. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:10, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As I mentioned before, WP:SIZESPLIT does not apply to the size of the content to (potentially) be split off. It applies to the size of the parent article. TompaDompa (talk) 18:13, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand why the main article lists records that are not allowed to be listed in this separate list. Nergaal (talk) 22:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Moved

There is no notability requirement to move a page from draft space to article space. However, for more unknown topics, it's not advised as it could be speedily deleted. This topic is clearly notable, but there is a question to be had about whether the records are independently notable from the movie itself, as the following pages. List_of_box_office_records_set_by_Deadpool or List_of_box_office_records_set_by_Star_Wars:_The_Force_Awakens. I know Other stuff exists, but that same question that other pages had will be had here. However, the correct decision after this move is to not move it back to draft space, but submit it to articles for deletion if there are certain editors who disagree. Considering that there are multiple long time, respected editors who disagree, that will be the correct avenue. Tutelary (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion started. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:38, 26 June 2018 (UTC)