This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Some of the franchises in the franchise list overlap, resulting in some movies' grosses counting towards multiple franchises. This is not a mistake. The short explanation is that this is how the franchise deals work and how our sources do it.
"If ancillary income from merchandise is included, then Star Wars is the most lucrative property; it holds the Guinness world record for the "most successful film merchandising franchise" and was valued at £19.51 billion (about $31 billion) in 2012"
We simply don't know the merch numbers for the Marvel Cinematic Universe (it's its own brand) because at this point it probably surpassed Star Wars. Timur9008 (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objections to removing it. It is out of date and isn't all that relevant to the topic of the article. Betty Logan (talk) 20:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we get up-to-date figures at some point in the future, I think we should add it back. The second paragraph of the article's body points out that theatrical revenue is only part of the story, after all. TompaDompa (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a problem with that. I'm almost certain I was the editor who added that information in the first place when I overhauled this article back in 2011/12 or whenever it was, because I felt it was helpful to have some further context there, that there were other forms of revenue. It's just that it wasn't really telling us anything factual at this point. Betty Logan (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of the merit of the proposal the numbers are slightly out anyway. I have been tracking the top 15 here in the hope of expanding the table eventually. My plan was to do it when we had a enough data for a top 20. As Luke Stark says, a top 15 is a rather arbitrary number, although I don't have strong feelings either way. At the moment though we can't go beyond The Exorcist, so we have to wait for films to enter above (most likely the Avatar sequels, because there doesn't seem to be anything else on the horizon with the capability of cracking $2 billion). Betty Logan (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deadpool and Wolverine question. Since Wolverine receives equal billing in the title alongside Deadpool, (the movie is called "Deadpool and Wolverine", not 'Deadpool 3') shouldn't the movie be included under both the "Deadpool" and "Wolverine" film series under the X-men franchise umbrella? I'm not saying to count the movie's box office number twice when calculating the X-men franchise total, only that the movie should be included within both the Deadpool movie list as well as the Wolverine movie list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.43.37.190 (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would have the fox x men films (x-men till new mutants) and mcu x men films (starting with deadpool & Wolverine) as two different sub series (within the x men franchise).
And sub entries for each fox series having original trilogy, Wolverine trilogy, prequel films series, Deadpool series and the new mutants standalone Fanoflionking3 (talk) 18:42, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the logic is that the Deadpool & Wolverine takes place in the Deadpool continuity and is not part of the Wolverine series, although I daresay you could argue that goes against the spirit of WP:INUNIVERSE. Your alternative suggestion of listing it under both entries but only counting the gross once in the X-Men total is also a sensible alternative. Ultimately, the casual reader will be interested in how much the Wolverine films have grossed and won't really care about different versions of Wolverine, so it does seem like an omission to not include it under the Wolverine entry. I think there is a WP:RS case for this approach too per The Numbers. Betty Logan (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This movie was called Deadpool 3 before changing the title, so I think we should keep it only in the Deadpool series, or we have to create the Fox section and the MCU section inside the X-Men franchise--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2024