Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice in Wonderland (franchise)

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:37, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alice in Wonderland (franchise)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The references are all primary, and there is no provided evidence that this is a notable franchise. The individual releases are notable, sure, but the franchise as a whole would appear to not be. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, and Disney. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — This seems like a pretty clear case of WP:NEXIST. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please provide proof of these sources existing? QuicoleJR (talk) 00:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@InfiniteNexus: Please provide the sources that you say exist. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:20, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sources for what? I brought up NEXIST because The references are all primary is the first sentence of your nomination. Each of the "main" articles on the franchise article has plenty of reliable secondary sources, which can easily be imported into this article, thus addressing the sourcing concern. Per WP:FILMSERIES, as long as a film series or franchise comprises three installments, provided that all of those installments demonstrate notability and there are sources calling the franchise a franchise, an article may be created. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are there reliable sources calling it a franchise? If so, can you provide them? QuicoleJR (talk) 16:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. New York Times, Vanity Fair, Forbes, Business Insider, IndieWire, /Film, Mashable, Screen Rant, ... InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:38, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - passes WP:GNG per the sources provided by InfiniteNexus. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 01:03, 30 May 2023 (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.