Talk:Horizon: An American Saga

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 12 June 2024 by reviewer Iwaqarhashmi (talk · contribs).

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Westerns Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Draftify

WP:FILMSERIES "A film series article should only be created when the series encompasses at least three films."

This film series article should not have been created (or moved out of draft space) yet. This results in yet another largely redundant film series article that adds little value over the individual articles for each film.

User:Rosguill tagged this article for notability with the edit summary:
"Added {{Notability}} tag: Seems a bit WP:TOOSOON, the amount of repeated content across sections of the article is concerning" (diff) and I believe this was correct. I believe User:DisneyMetalhead was premature in removing the tag (diff) misuderstanding that the subject is notable enough to create a page for each of the released films, that the film series as a whole doesn't yet have enough different separate information from the individual film articles to necessitate yet another film series article.

@Rosguill: Do you accept the removal of your tag? Do you think there is enough new here for this article to even exist yet? -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 11:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Chapter 3 has started filming, so a standalone article for that can be created, satisfying WP:FILMSERIES. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so you don't think this should be pushed back to draft space. Are you happy with the high level of redundancy (and low quality) of this and other film series articles? Do you there there was enough here to remove the {{Notability}} tag already? -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality can be improved and isn't a reason for a soft delete. As for film series articles, there will always be redundancy in scope. It's information across 3-4 articles grouped on a high level. As the rest of the films come out, this can also be a place for commentary across multiple films that won't necessarily be found in any one article. Or at least, we can sample specific reviews that compare the film of focus to past film(s). An individual film article can focus more on the film's own quality without that comparison. Furthermore, filming being underway for a third film warrants a standalone article and means that the film is extremely likely to come out. (If it was still in development, I wouldn't have supported a film series article just yet.) Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"this can also be a place for commentary across multiple films that won't necessarily be found in any one article" in theory maybe, in practice nearly all these film series articles add very little extra. -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 13:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a lot of film series articles do not have that content. If an editor wanted such an article to be a Good or Featured Article, it should have that. I rarely edit film series articles but I think I did the prose at The Santa Clause (franchise) § Critical and public response.

But as a reader, I do benefit from seeing the high-level details in aggregate, rather than having to look across 3+ articles. To me, it's another way to organize content. Like I think there could be more character-centric articles because film articles are too broad, meaning that when we sample reviews, it's more about how a film has been received in general, even though the same reviews could also have comments about the characters. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These film series articles might be less awful and redundant if people didn't keep creating them artificially and prematurely (and reviewers approving them in spite of WP:FILMSERIES). If the individual film articles were grown organically and getting too big, and starting to contain a lot of material that was better suited to a film series article, that was then WP:SPLIT off into a separate page, then these articles might actually stand a chance of achieving what in theory they are already supposed to be doing.

Instead were going to get yet another low quality largely redundant article that is unlikely to ever get much past Start class. -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 13:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand what you're looking for. An ideal film series article can have two parts: the aggregate detail, and high-level commentary that won't fit in any one article. Most articles have just the first part. But I don't see these articles' existence, and having only that first part, to mean that it is less likely to ever have the second part. The second part is the harder part regardless, and like many sections in most individual film articles, that will be underdeveloped until an editor with motivation comes along. WP:FILMSERIES has at the end of its section what an ideal film-series article should have. If you want, you can advocate for a fuller guideline in that regard. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I explained it pretty clearly. These kinds of film series articles tend to be low quality, and premature. It would be better if they didn't exist at all until there was enough real content (not mere repetition) to justify a WP:SPLIT. The second part as you put it, doesn't happen, and it even seems unlikely that higher level of overview and analysis will ever happen for most Wikipedia film series articles. It doesn't even feel like the existing WP:FILMSERIES guidelines are being enforced so I do not think it would be a good idea for me to try and become a wiki lawyer and argue for even more strict guidelines. -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 00:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If no one cares enough to improve The Godfather (film series) past C class quality what hope is there for lesser film series articles. (That's a rhetorical question.) -- 109.76.139.141 (talk) 00:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, you want film-series articles to be created only if they are of quality. But why this higher standard for film series compared to films? There are a lot of low-quality film articles. Is it your general philosophy to deny articles' existence until they can be born well-written, or is it just something particularly noxious about film-series topics? For me, at worst, it's just a collection of aggregate information. And honestly, neither The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are quality articles despite their reputations, lacking any film criticism and interpretation for either, despite copious books and scholarly articles about both. Vertigo (film) is pretty lacking too. The general challenge of editing Wikipedia is that it's easiest to compile information available online right now (including the aggregate information) and deeper plunges of resources involve access to them and time to put together something truly unique. And fair enough on not wanting to add more guidelines. I'm sure it would help a lot to have a Featured Article film series article to set a high standard to follow. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The persistent low quality of Film series articles, the largely redundant information, and failure to develop into higher quality article makes it seem like they are not actually noteworthy as series. Most of the low quality film series articles remind me of the many low stub quality Wikipedia film article that no longer exist. Are there any Film series articles that have achieved Featured Article quality? (If so have they actually done so by achieving a quality article or by totally dropping the bar the way list class articles do?) -- 109.77.200.184 (talk) 04:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I continue to be skeptical of the idea that a series can be considered notable as a series prior to the release of even the first film. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The release of this film series is not conventional, purposefully by its filmmaker. As the first 2 movies are releasing months apart, and the 3rd movie is currently also filming -- for this reason, the previous discussion determined that an article would be constructive. DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENT: 109.76.139.141 - I don't understand what the confusion/issue is. Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 are filmed and release is imminent. Once they are released there will be more details on this article. Secondly, Chapter 3 is currently filming and Costner states he is making Chapter 4 after that. There are various notable and reliable sources on this article. As @Erik: stated, this article can be improved with additional details and references as they become available. The film series is notable, and film series articles are beneficial to view all aggregated information on one single page. Your arguments sound more like personal preference. There was a discussion on the talk page for Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1 about its title, and part of the issues it was having were resolved by making this film series article.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 16:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no confusion, it is clear that rules have not been applied fairly and consistently. Excuse and exceptions have been made yet again to allow this film series article to exist even before 1 film was released, nevermind that the guidelines expressly state that 3 films should be released before making a film series article. I challenge you to keep working on this article and see how high and far you can bring a film series article. I will be pleasantly surprised if this doesn't turn out to be yet another film series article stuck at low quality and unlikely to ever improve. -- 109.77.200.184 (talk) 04:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a one off thing, it has been clear for a long time that the editors approving DRAFT articles are paying no attention to WP:FILMSERIES and keep approving franchise articles such as this (and others even more recently such as Smile (franchise)) when not even a second film has been released yet. Commenters above seemed surprised at my objections about the early creation of this article but it isn't just this article it is the many franchise articles that keep getting created prematurely. Again I reiterate my challenge to editors to keep working on this article about Horizon and bring it all the way to Featured article quality. -- 109.79.160.15 (talk) 20:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takes place in post-Civil War America, not "pre- and post-Civil War"

I've just come back from viewing Chapter 1 at the cinema and I'm pretty sure the story starts in 1868. Can anyone confirm? If so, this article and the one about Chapter 1 should be corrected. 207.60.71.246 (talk) 02:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per critic Richard Brody in the New Yorker,

"Kevin Costner’s “Horizon” Goes West but Gets Nowhere" (June 28, 2024):

"Horizon is an outpost in what is now Arizona, and the movie opens in 1859, with three white surveyors staking out the land."

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/07/08/horizon-an-american-saga-chapter-1-movie-review DonFB (talk) 04:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]