Talk:Adventure into Fear (franchise)

Merge to Helstrom?

Now that's Helstrom's officially canceled, I was wondering if it might be best served to merge this info to a "Planned franchise" section at Helstrom's article? Take most of the development and a good chunk of Ghost Rider (or the whole subsection) and put it there. Thoughts? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Or alternatively, if we keep this, make "Series" simply "Helstrom", remove the existing subsection called that, and morph in "Cast and characters" and "Reception" to this new, larger "Helstrom" section. I think that'd help part of the issue I'm seeing with this as it stands. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

This is what I'm thinking for a reworked section here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm all for this alternative approach. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I'll make this adjustment. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Since Dark Universe does not have an article due to the universe being cancelled after only one film, the same applies here. Kailash29792 (talk) 01:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Not necessarily. I think there is more information about the planned franchise and Ghost Rider than would make sense to have at Helstrom, so the only good place to put it would be at List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series but since that article is just a summary of all the shows, having all of this "Adventure into Fear" info there would be ridiculous WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. I think Favre's adjustments are a good improvement, and there is room for a bit more expansion if we ever get any more details about the other planned shows, not to mention some additional critical commentary on how this "franchise" ended up going. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:58, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. But that's why I initially said this could merge into Helstrom should it come to that, but I think this has enough notability on its own for an individual article to exist. If it in many months time we find there really isn't much else to expand upon it, then perhaps we revisit a merge into Helstrom. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Gabriel Luna's interview

https://comicbook.com/marvel/news/hulu-ghost-rider-crossover-helstrom-marvel-shows/

Gabriel Luna revealed additional details on Ghost Rider and the Adventure into Fear franchise. The unproduced franchise would be comprised of four series, with the the last being a "Defenders-esque" crossover with the character Lilith as the main villain. YgorD3 (talk) 16:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done Added, plus additional info that was in the larger Ghost Rider character piece from the site. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:10, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Reviving potential merger into Helstrom

It has previously been said that there was significantly more known about *Ghost Rider* and Adventure into Fear than there was about the Dark Universe plans (another franchise which was cancelled, please read discussion above). While that may appear to be the case looking at length of the respective text dedicated to them, the contents of this article’s coverage of Ghost Rider and the planned franchise uses either unnecessary information or unnecessary phrasing. I will go through and condense the information later today, but I would like to revive the possibility of moving it on over to the Helstrom article and deleting this page. ChimaFan12 (talk) 19:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

There is more than enough information in this article that is not relevant to Helstrom to justify having the separate article. If we were to merge this with anything it would be List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series, but the cleaner we can keep that article the better. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Sadly this just isn’t true. So much of this article is redundant or unnecessary information. It needs to be whittled down ASAP. ChimaFan12 (talk) 06:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

There is no need to condense this. Every detail included in this article is about the planned franchise and what Marvel Television had planned for it and the other shows that were in development. Cutting it down will not make it as clear to general audiences what transpired. Merging it into either Helstrom or the MCU TV series list would include far more than is necessary there, hence this article's existence to organize that information in a centralized location here. Trailblazer101 (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

No, there is a massive need. The body spends two entire sections to stating the same things: Netflix shows were cancelled, they wanted a come back (if this is included, it should only be ONCE and in far less words), additional shows were in development. The first two paragraphs are nearly identical in substance. It’s beyond redundant. Almost the entire section is devoted to paraphrasing an article that’s already cited, including details that don’t need to be on there, and repeating other details throughout the entire body. It tells me nothing about the development, it tells me “Netflix shows cancelled, Hulu can do same thing as Netflix” at least twice. Meanwhile you’re obstructing other information that is necessary and will make it clear to audiences what transpired: the shows were no longer MCU. ChimaFan12 (talk) 17:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

There is too much additional non-Helstrom info to have it be improper to merge it to that article. Adventure into Fear is notable in its own right, even if nothing ever ultimately materialized for it beyond Helstrom. Thus, this article is good to remain to cover all of that information, while Helstrom's article can remain about that series, while simply touching upon it's planned connections to this franchise. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Adventure into Fear is less notable than the Dark Universe, which also doesn’t have a page. And no, there’s not too much non-Helstrom content on the page. There’s too much redundant content on the page that can be whittled down appropriately to fit into a section on the Helstrom page. The redundancy of the content shows how poorly suited it is for its own page. ChimaFan12 (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The entirety of the Ghost Rider section alone warrants it not being included on the Helstrom article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Ghost Rider can go into a cancelled shows section on List of Marvel TV shows, but much of the content in that section overlaps with what’s in development. How you guys operate confuses me because you consider putting essential details in the lead redundant but not putting the same thing — in the same wording — in multiple paragraphs. It seems as though you have inconsistent standards and values that ultimately appears to be a form of obstruction against anyone who wants to make any change. ChimaFan12 (talk) 23:56, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Please focus on the topic of discussion and not make personal comments about other editors. If you think there is a bunch or irrelevant information in this article then you should put together a list that specifies those things so we can respond to them in turn. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I made no personal comment. I’m referring to all three of you who are preventing any changes to the article, and the collective inconsistencies of the rationale and so-called principles behind the obstruction. I have also been committed to this discussion even when others preferred not to in order to attempt to intimidate and punish me for making changes. ChimaFan12 (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

While I cannot speak to the 3RR report, criticizing a taskforce built by various members of the encyclopedia with the core guidelines and policies as a backbone for it is not helpful in getting your initial points across, and not entirely WP:Civil or WP:Assuming good faith of the editors involved. Ghost Rider can (and should) be noted at List of unproduced television projects based on Marvel Comics, although the Adventure into Fear coverage of it, Helstrom, and the other planned series and narrative that did not eventuate are still notable for a standalone article here. We previously had a List of unproduced Marvel Cinematic Universe projects article that got folded into the others unproduced Marvel articles, so there is not really another location to store this information on the planned franchise that would not overload one subject, such as Helstrom or the MCU TV series list, with material on a wider subject. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

You three in particular do not represent the full taskforce, not that would make a difference. I am full-chested in my criticism of the clique-ish and obstructive nature of your interactions, which raise issues of Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Adventure into Fear belongs in that same article of unproduced television projects because, although Helstrom aired, Adventure into Fear does not exist. Helstrom can mention it was intended to exist, but objectively speaking it does not and there isn’t enough content to justify its existence given the redundancies and limited information. ChimaFan12 (talk) 23:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

You don't get to go around edit warring and enforcing your own preferred version of multiple articles and then claim that we are the ones with an ownership problem. We are all working together to build consensus and follow the guidelines. I tried to get this conversation back on a constructive track but obviously you are not interested in working together to resolve this issue. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I am interested in resolving this, but not by conceding to indefensible falsehoods that simply aren’t supported by evidence or rooted in real world truth. It’s that simple. ChimaFan12 (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Condensing Development section

I've been working on a little mock-up of what it could look like to condense the development section of the page. Just about all the same information is there, minus Loeb's remark about entering a "chilling new corner of the Marvel Universe," just because I had a hard time finding where to put that exact quote and I think the rest of the section sort of establishes that it's meant to be a block of horror shows. The only other thing is that I moved a paragraph about Marvel's Helstrom to the section about Helstrom. I feel like the MCU/not MCU information should be placed in its own section entitled "Relationship to the MCU" because it's mostly a matter of conflicting reporting that doesn't belong in the general development section.

Note: this mock-up only applies to the sections I've mentioned above. I have not touched the Ghost Rider section, though I think I will have a pass at that next. I'm curious to know what you all think. ChimaFan12 (talk) 00:22, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@ChimaFan12: I've restored some of the previous formatting from what you've done. As I said in my edit summary, we do, to an extent, still need some chronological info. For example, it should be noted with the 2019 announcements that the plan then was to build an interconnected universe with these initial two shows, and then we go on to state that yes those plans started to progress with Hulu in the second paragraph. I removed the Hit-Monkey/MODOK adds because those don't relate here. I also restored about the GR development at ABC, as that is necessary to provide the context as to why they didn't want to develop at ABC. It wasn't just because they had shows, it was specifically GR, which then in turn was announced initially for these series. Here is the resulting overall diff from what had been on the page, with your changes and then my adjustments. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

The info is chronological in my edit. As for the Offenders shows, do relate, those series had been in development prior to the announcement of AIF, and certainly the partnership with Hulu (including those shows) was evoked. The Ghost Rider development belongs in the Ghost Rider development section, and the "MCU" part is conflicted by other sources completely. A more in-depth analysis of whether it's in the MCU or not, considering all the sources, belongs in its own section. We can't simply unequivocally declare it MCU when key sources who broke the news about the show said that it was not. ChimaFan12 (talk) 20:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I have partially restored a few things that I don't think should have been removed. I also think we need to keep the other abandoned projects in that section rather than just merging them into the development section. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Adam, can you tell me what “the Marvel logo is not featured before each episode” of Helstrom has to do with the development of Adventure into Fear? Let’s start there.

We also don’t know what was supposed to be a project. We only know trademarks were filed. We can possibly mention that in development. We have zero concrete information to state those were cancelled projects. Lastly, the MCU is only invoked once in the article cited after the MCU is brought up in your edit: to state that Adventure into Fear will not crossover with the MCU. The article later states that it will occupy the same universe as Marvel’s other shows, but there are a lot of universes Marvel Television was involved with and the term “universe” has been used by people involved to refer to different things. Paul Z used it to say Helstrom was in its own part of the Marvel Universe that wasn’t the MCU. Variety also states that the show is a completely new iteration of Ghost Rider with no ties to Agents of SHIELD. We cannot state the show is MCU. That is a lie. ChimaFan12 (talk) 01:25, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

1. Removing the Marvel logo from before each episode was a big part of distancing Helstrom from the MCU, and the fact that this happened is important to Adventure into Fear since it means the whole planned project was ultimately distanced from the MCU. It should be at least mentioned in the development section.

2. The only difference between mentioning the trademarks in the development section vs the abandoned projects section is that moving them to the development section means the abandoned projects section only has Ghost Rider in it. I considered changing it to being just a Ghost Rider section but looked at the other Marvel TV pages and realised that would be unnecessarily inconsistent with them.

3. Ghost Rider was originally announced as being separate but Loeb later clarified that it would reference Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. At that point Helstrom and Adventure into Fear were also described as being in their own corner of the MCU but both were ultimately distanced from the franchise when Marvel TV was shut down. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

I’m too busy to tackle all three arguments at the moment but trust that I will get to the others. Regarding #2, you are saying that the reason we’re indicating, without any substance backing it up, that these trademarks were for their own projects under this block, was to emulate other pages? And to you that’s a good enough reason? Please be completely honest and serious about this. ChimaFan12 (talk) 02:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

We don't know what the trademarks ultimately were going to be used for, but they weren't definitively for announced projects for AiF, so it doesn't feel proper to list them in "development", which should be reserved for formally announced projects related to the group. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense to include them there if they’re going to be included at all. It doesn’t give the false notion that they’re anything specific, it just says they’re trademarks that were filed during development. I don’t know why you’re suddenly making that arbitrary distinction when it would make far more sense to reserve the abandoned projects section for actually announced projects. If they’re going to be anywhere, the trademarks are a perfect fit for development. ChimaFan12 (talk) 18:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)