An editor just attempted to split out content from this article to create a series article. However, the general consensus has been that a series article is not necessary unless there are at least 3 games. We really just have 2 actual games, and upcoming bare bones remaster, and some minor bits about an aborted third entry. Additionally, this article is currently nowhere near needing a WP:SIZESPLIT. Sergecross73 msg me 12:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Oppose Split per above. Sergecross73 msg me 12:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Split per reasons outlined. Timur9008 ( talk) 14:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Timur9008: Any response to the below statement? Rather than WP:PERNOM. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 12:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Support "However, the general consensus has been that a series article is not necessary unless there are at least 3 games." Besides the fact that there are, including the HD Remaster, this is abjectly false. Consensus was to keep Left 4 Dead (series) as a page despite the series having a total of 2 games. There was also a large amount of unnecessary info about the series as a whole on the page of the first game that merited a split, not necessarily based on size but relevance to the actual game itself. The Remaster concerns both games in one package and would be repetitive to talk about twice on the pages of both games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 12:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Well, the Left 4 Dead (franchise) has comics and Merchandise and other products. What Trekker said here [1] Timur9008 ( talk) 12:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Timur9008: And this franchise has 2 novels in addition to the games. I'm sure it has some merchandise too in Japan. There is pretty much no difference between the two franchises in terms of relative importance, so clearly the "3 game" thing was made up and not a real consensus. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 13:00, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Sorry for the weak reply (I haven't really slept well) but I don't see anything wrong with talking about the Remaster on the pages of both games.

  Would love more input from other editors though. Timur9008 ( talk) 13:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Completely agreed. Especially considering the new content on the remaster is currently summed up in about 3 sentences. Hardly a problematic amount of overlap across 2 articles. It's a pretty barebones remaster. Sergecross73 msg me 13:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Any other time, I would have loved to see someone think BK was on par with big games like Left 4 Dead, but the reality is that it's a terrible, apples to oranges WP:OSE comparison. Sergecross73 msg me 13:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I'd like to see actual cited proof that Left 4 Dead is so much bigger and more important rather than just an assertion with no evidence. Since Baten Kaitos was most well known in Japan, this seems like a WP:IDONTKNOWIT issue. Keep in mind that the Baten Kaitos series has been mentioned numerous times in reliable sources, as a group, such as this Kotaku article bringing up both at once as meriting a remaster. With nothing backing up the assertion that it is relatively unimportant in comparison, it devolves into personal opinion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 18:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  And if we're not allowed to compare importance of series due to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, then the only thing left to compare is how many games can be in a series for a series page to exist. Clearly, due to the Left 4 Dead debate, the answer is at least 2 games and assorted media. The Baten Kaitos series has 2 games, and assorted media. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 18:04, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Not sure why I'm being asked to disprove your unproven assertion, but beyond that, it's basic to see. Left 4 Dead are multimillion selling. Neither BK was anywhere near a million. They're not comparable series at all. Sergecross73 msg me 18:05, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  A much better comparison point would be at Talk:Xenoblade (series), Monolith Soft's more popular series, which had a clear consensus against having its own series article back in 2015 when only two entries existed. I've been involved in far more discussions that went in this direction. Left 4 Dead is an exception, not a common outcome. Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  An exception perhaps, but a very one-sided and clear decision in favor of it. There was almost no room for doubt that it was sufficient for a page, with only you voting to merge it, while everyone else voted keep. User:Masem argued in that discussion "It is entirely possible to cover all that in only two articles, but this three-article approach makes it a bit easier for organizing the information. Certainly it is not an issue of notability with the series/franchise as a whole." The same is the case for Baten Kaitos. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 21:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Outside of the 3-4 sentences I added about the remaster yesterday, the rest of the content has largely fit easily inside the 2 existing articles for the last 3-6 years, when I rewrote each respective article. Sergecross73 msg me 21:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Oppose. Bringing up Left 4 Dead feels very "other thing exists." As Serge notes, the unsuccessful deletion discussion wasn't a declaration that two games was the standard to aim for, it was that there are circumstances that may call for exceptions to common practice. The reason why people felt that Left 4 Dead was an exception to common practice is not the reason why Baten Kaitos might. - Whadup, it's ya girl, Dusa ( talk) 12:44, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Split, as Serge points out there are exceptions, but this isn't one of them. A niche JRPG duology that's getting a remaster plus one cancelled entry that can be dealt with in a paragraph of text or less isn't what I'd call worthy of a series article. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 21:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Also side note here, but a lot of the stuff here that might've been used to justified this discussion just looks like bloat that could be trimmed down or cut out. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 21:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per the points raised by other editors in this discussion. Haleth ( talk) 17:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Oppose There are times when splitting a topic into more articles only makes it harder to follow, and this is one of them. It makes sense to have an article for the game, and an article for the follow-up. The cancelled entry is best dealt with in a paragraph. As an aside, I think the Left for Dead franchise article is pretty poor, and an ineffective way to organize the topic, but that's WP:OTHERSTUFF. Shooterwalker ( talk) 12:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Oppose - A series article is problematic when you have only two installments (and even when you have 3-5 installments in the majority of cases) because it's hard to find coverage establishing that the series even exists, much less has notability independent from its component installments, and even harder to come up with content that wouldn't comfortably fit within the article for one installment or the other. Looking over the initial draft for the article, those two problems seem to apply just as much to Baten Kaitos as to any other two-part series.-- Martin IIIa ( talk) 21:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC) reply