This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hawaii 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.HawaiiWikipedia:WikiProject HawaiiTemplate:WikiProject HawaiiHawaii
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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 reviewafter discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Comment: Consider The Lion King, and how that takes you to the '94 animated classic film instead of the Jon Favreau 2019 "live-action" version, The Lion King (2019 film).
Some may argue to move on merit of page views; others may argue on what has long-term, overall significance. I'd invite someone to present pageviews and/or arguments about significance. BarntToust20:10, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The original 2002 film is definitely the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, not the franchise. See coverage like [1][2][3]—it's the original film that is most remembered when sources refer to "Lilo and Stitch". Like BarntToust, I see it as similar to The Lion King, which also spawned a franchise, but the title with the longest-term significance is the original 1994 film. If the 2025 remake surpasses the 2002 film in significance, we can reconsider this in a few months after it comes out—but preemptively moving it on the suspicion that it might compete with the original as the primary topic would be a violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Mz7 (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the reasons stated by User:Mz7. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. WP policy per WP:V and WP:NOR is that we always follow, we do not lead. Also, the How to Train Your Dragon movies (live-action and animated) are fundamentally different because they were derived from the series of books by that name. The original animated Lilo & Stitch film was an original work. --Coolcaesar (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Follows the typical practice that when a film launches a franchise that goes by the same name, the launching film typically gets the COMMONNAME, ala Back to the Future and Shrek (though I think this should be normalized via a consensus at WP:FILM). Masem (t) 12:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per reasons stated. Perhaps if the remake somehow surpasses interest in the original film, renaming could be rediscussed, but keep in mind that searches/page views will likely surge when the movie’s newly released before tapering off. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 08:15, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
.svg){kind=small}
