Talk:Home Alone (franchise)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No Cast for HAIII?[edit]

There is literally no casting for Kevin and other main charators for the Home Alone Cast section for the 3rd installment. Add it in! I need to know who did him. 70.62.142.66 (talk) 23:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC) the third movie have different characters.[reply]

why is the fourth movie the only one without it own article[edit]

it deserves its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 18:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm making an article for Home Alone 4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.182.93 (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

seems that the fourth movie takes place between the first and the second[edit]

considering kevin`s age. i believe that he is 9 in the fourth while he is 10 in the second. logic therefore dictates that it takes place between the first and the second. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Since his parents were married in both 1 and 2, it doesn't make sense that it would be "between" 1 and 2. NebraskaDontAsk (talk) 18:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More Refrences and Lead section[edit]

The arcticle has more refreces. Should we delete the thing about needing more refreces? The lead is also expanded. Should we delete the issue for that too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.182.93 (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. There's a clear consensus here that the first film per the appropriate naming conventions is the primary topic of interest here, and as such I have moved the series article to Home Alone (film series) and the original film to Home Alone. I'll add a hatnote to the article to point to the film series. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 05:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC) Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 05:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


– I was kind of surprised to see this setup. I think it's more likely that a reader searching for "Home Alone" expects the article about the original film. (Heck, that's what I expected.) The film series article is not really a natural destination; a search term like "Home Alone movies" or "Home Alone films" should lead there instead. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. I'm surprised you were surprised. You knew there were more movies than just one, right? It's very standard for the base name to be about the film series, if most of the films incorporated the name into their titles. Powers T 11:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    My point is, the original film is the primary topic over the film series. What else is one supposed to type to get to the original film, knowing that there are additional films? That's why I mentioned the two other terms. In addition, I'm requesting it because it is a precedent. Here are some arrangements: Death Wish, Beverly Hills Cop, Free Willy, Ghostbusters, Hellraiser, The Matrix, Once Upon a Time in China, Scary Movie, Silent Night, Deadly Night, The Prophecy, Wrong Turn, etc. That arrangement being common is why I expected the first film article. I think it comes down to this: readers don't know whether or not to expect a film series article, since one does not always exist. It is kind of an artificial setup that aggregates information, even if they do not use sources that explicitly discuss the series as a whole. In this case, the film series article is pretty weak. The first two films have all the fame. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support No one is searching for the latter two films. Even the people in those films are not searching for those films except to scrub their names from the cast listing. Home Alone is the search term people would use to search for the iconic film and is the title the article should be under as the first film is the primary topic. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Certainly I'd be searching for the iconic original film, Home Alone (film). IMO, rlatively few would be looking up the series. AlbertBowes (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The film series article is really weak, I'm not a big fan of film series articles anyway. It's confusing to see the infobox for the first film but it isn't the article you want. I think we can all agree everyone will be looking for the first film. --Peppagetlk 15:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I didn't even realize that there was a fourth film. I recalled a third vaguely, but typically when I think of Home Alone I'm thinking of the original film. Otherwise, I'm thinking of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York. It makes better sense to me to have it be "film series" and have the original be unambiguated.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per nom--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The move is completely consistent with WP:NCF. Is there are reason to overrule the guideline? On the basis of page accesses, the film article received 600,000 hits in 2010 while the series article received 700,000 hits. It's most likely that the majority of visitors looking for the film article accessed the series article first, since it occupied the base name, so it's possible that 600,000 of those 700,000 series hits carried through to the film article. Given that the original film is clearly the most notable work in the franchise, and everything else is derivative of that work, then it is entirely appropriate for the original film to be assigned the base name. Betty Logan (talk) 15:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I can't add anything to the argument, except that I agree with the supporters. Famartin (talk) 22:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Agree entirely with the supporters above. Most people would assume to find the film. not the series, at "Home Alone". Also, Betty's stats support that. Jenks24 (talk) 01:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cinema vs tv movies[edit]

Any reason why we should remove the made-for-tv movies completely? I'd guess that someone has retained or bought the rights over the years, so they are all connected in that way. --Ronz (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Home Alone (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 November 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 07:17, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Home Alone (franchise) → Home Alone (film series) – Per WP:NCFILM, the disambiguator "(franchise)" should only be used for multimedia franchises. This is just a film series article. The video games are too minor for this to be considered a fully-blown franchise. 212.135.65.247 (talk) 11:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - the "minor" or not (and how is this determined?) the games exist, so this is franchise. FOARP (talk) 13:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the video games are tie-ins to specific films. As they are not independent (with standalone stories, for example), they should not be enough to merit expansion to "franchise". -- Netoholic @ 15:40, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment For the sake of comparison, I tried to find some analogous examples. Here are some articles that use the (franchise) disambiguator despite having only relatively obscure/minor tie-in elements (video games, novelizations, etc.):
Conversely, I was also able to find some examples of articles using the (film series) disambiguator despite listing some other connected media:
So I'm not seeing a lot of consistency here. Colin M (talk) 21:25, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency is what RMs are for. -- Netoholic @ 03:31, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Pinoczet (talk) 07:30, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and agree it's a strain to categorize this as much more than a film franchise. ╠╣uw [talk] 19:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's a while other media section. "Minor" is the anon's opinion. Ribbet32 (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

WP:USERGENERATED Audience scores not allowed.[edit]

WP:USERGENERATED says Audience scores such as those from IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes are not allowed.

User:DisneyMetalhead claims it is acceptable to make an exception (as he attempted to do in other articles before), but hasn't bothered to show that these scores are WP:NOTABLE or to show that there was significant coverage from other sources (as in rare cases where there are claims of a significant disconnect between audiences and critics) or to form a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS to ignore the rules. -- 109.76.155.125 (talk) 14:41, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not see anything to suggest any of these user voted web polls are notable. Including Rotten Tomatoes user votes is bad, including IMDB votes is worse. Stop making assertions and back up your claims of notability.
User:DisneyMetalhead has been reverted repeatedly first by User:Prefall and also by me. Note that WP:BRD specifically says "Discuss on a talk page" and that comments made in edit summaries are not sufficient.
Feel free to request WP:3RD other opinions. -- 109.79.186.239 (talk) 02:08, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
One of the arguments made in edit summaries was that there aren't critic scores available for the later straight-to-video films. (If anything this only shows how non-notable they are.) It would be better to not include them in the table at all, rather than including user voted web polls. -- 109.79.186.239 (talk) 02:22, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@User:109.79.186.239; As I have stated multiple times - when a franchise has various installments in it (regardless of whether it is theatrically released or straight-to-video), it is notable to show the overall reception to the entire franchise. This article is an overall topic of the franchise/film series. It is not just about theatrical releases. On top of this, audience scores are absolutely notable when the critic reviews differ greatly from the audience. This is a discussion that takes place on various articles - not just this one.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 16:56, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you have stated, and made assertions that it is notable but you have not ever actually shown that it is notable or even shown that you have any kind of a local consensus to support you making exception so that you can include user voted web polls in articles. More fundamentally you seem to think these scores are useful to readers, but haven't said what exactly it is you are trying to say to readers, or why you think they are useful.
You claim incorrectly "audience scores are absolutely notable when the critic reviews differ greatly from the audience" that is at best partly true, it is only sometimes allowed in that case, and usually there needs to be significant coverage from other sources to show it is notable. (When I say significant coverage I mean articles such as Sticks_&_Stones_(film)#Audience_response and The_Orville#Audience_response where various reputable sources wrote about how there was significant difference between audience reactions and critic reactions. According to Rotten Tomatoes no reputable critics have even reviewed Home Alone 4 or 5.)
You are also claiming that the reviews score differ substantially. They do differ slightly for some films (unless you are trying to claim the complete lack of any critic reviews for the straight to video features is significant) but there a positive self selection bias is to be expected in audience polls and you should at least have a someone else besides you agreeing that this difference is significant. -- 109.79.165.65 (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with the IP user's assessment of the situation. The locking of the article mid-dispute is fine, though I believe the admin has chosen the wrong revision as STATUSQUO. Perhaps WT:FILM should be notified of this discussion for more opinions, as no one besides the involved parties seem to be watching this page. Prefall 20:04, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is best to put this to WT:FILM as you say. They can decide if they want to open the door to these sorts of exceptions to WP:USERGENERATED or not.
Unfortunately shouldn't even be here, since have many other things I should be doing, I'm working Monday to Friday this week same as any other. I really shouldn't be back to this discussion before Friday. I will bring it to WT:FILM then if no one else does first. -- 109.79.165.65 (talk) 23:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To add a belated conclusion to the above discussion, DisneyMetalhead did this so persistently across so many Franchise articles I eventually had to take it to Project Film for discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Film/Archive_20#Audience_scores
The discussion reiterated that WP:USERGENERATED applies to all film articles including franchise articles, and that IMDB votes and Rotten Tomatoes audience scores are not allowed. -- 109.76.137.180 (talk) 14:11, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Home Alone which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:03, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seventh Film, citation needed?[edit]

"Also, an R-rated seventh film, intended to be directed by Augustine Frizzell, entered development hell."

Is there a source for this? 2601:5CE:4380:3A0:AC2E:5DF7:98D2:D337 (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Home_Alone_(franchise)&oldid=1216681920"