Talk:List of fictional shared universes in film and television

Fawlty Towers and Only Fools and Horses

These two classic British sitcoms are listed as being in the same universe in the TV section, but I can't establish that they share any characters or scenarios at all. I'm intrigued what justifies their collective inclusion? Coop (talk) 13:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I can answer my own question as I was whining about this elsewhere in public and was pointed to this news item which claims the Radio Times listed two minor characters (Miss Tibbs and Miss Gatsby) as having the same names when appearing in both shows. More info at [[1]] Coop (talk) 14:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

It's a bit of a weak link, two characters share a name according to a Radio Times magazine no one can verify.

If the names were spoken,or in the credits it would hibt at some kind of link.

Radio Times could easily say Kevin Costner played Robin Hood in Waterworld, but it means nothing as the actual source material does not give a name. 2A04:4A43:8D9F:F107:54F7:8C36:BEE5:D3FC (talk) 15:18, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion

If and when anyone feels up to it, the list could probably be split into two sections (one for TV, one for Film) Ncboy2010 (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, someone did, and it's rather nonsensical. The MCU is in Films despite having at least four television series in that universe, and Star Trek is in television despite 12 films.

Another section could be added for mutimedia? Ashleighhhh (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Nonsense

Just because a show contains fictional characters and fictional storylines does not mean it is set in a fictional universe. Most stories ever writtena re set in the universe. dictionary.com defines universe as:

u·ni·verse [yoo-nuh-vurs] Show IPA noun 1. the totality of known or supposed objects and phenomena throughout space; the cosmos; macrocosm. 2. the whole world, especially with reference to humanity: a truth known throughout the universe. 3. a world or sphere in which something exists or prevails: his private universe. 4. Also called universe of discourse. Logic. the aggregate of all the objects, attributes, and relations assumed or implied in a given discussion. 5. Also called universal set. Mathematics . the set of all elements under discussion for a given problem.

So, having millions of "fictional universes" is wrong on multiple levels.

Even so, given a well-known example. In Star Trek(TOS) a remark was made that NASA's first shuttle was called 'Enterprise'. This was of course before NASA even had a shuttle. In the 70's NASA prepared to send their first shuttle into space. Only it wasn't going to be called 'Enterprise'. Trek fans wrote countless thousands of letters, some rather frantic, to NASA asking/requesting/demanding that the shuttle be renamed 'Enterprise', which it was. Now, if Star Trek was supposed to be set in a "fictional universe" called "the Star Trek Universe", why would it have mattered that NASA's shuttle and the one mentioned in TOS had different names? Why do fans come up with theories stating that the various conflicts ion the 1990's were actually part of a worldwide struggle led by the behind-the-scenes manipulator Khan Noonien Singh, and the truth about this War will only be revealed when documents are declassified later this century? Again, if Trek was always supposed to be set in a "fictional universe", what difference would it make?.....Why also would Doctor Who create a story of pure continuity like Attack of the Cybermen? In case you didn't know. the 1966 Doctor Who story The Tenth Planet had Earth being invaded, very visibly and shown on television, by Cybermen in 1986(then 20 years in the future). However, the 1985 story Attack of the Cybermen has time travellers effectively removing the 1986 invasion from history a year before it happens. Why go to that level of continuity if the 1986 shown in The Tenth Planet was always supposed to be taking place in a "fictional universe" called "the Doctor Who Universe" or the even-more-nausea-inducing "the Whoniverse"?

The fact is, certain shows, comics, franchises etc. may well deliberately state that their stories are taking place in "fictional universes". However, that most certainly does not mean that all fiction takes place in these "fictional universes". This article is completely unsourced, and features enormous OR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.132.49.148 (talk) 06:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Fictional universe describes what is meant: "A fictional universe is a self-consistent imaginary setting with events, and often other elements, that differ from the real world." PrimeHunter (talk) 21:30, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The given reference is absurd. In the Doctor Who universe, a spaceship crashed into London, and aliens kill the Prime Minister. Two different fictional characters occupy the position, including an evil alien. Multiple things that have happened and not been redacted by time travel have appeared throughout the series. Yes, certain events have been brought into line with reality. But a lot of things haven't.

I think for the purposes of this article, if it's to exist at all, it should refer strictly to universes in which multiple stories occur. Like, Doctor Who has Sarah Jane Adventures and Torchwood, numerous books, radio, etc. That's plausibly an entire 'universe' existing outside our own. I'm not sure the same can be said for Fringe or Carnivale - although the world is different, it's really more of a fictional setting. 08:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.246.28 (talk) No, what is "absurd" is your interpretation. Doctor Who (1963-1989) and Doctor Who (2005-) are two totally separate entities. No one denies that the 2005- series espouses the "Whoniverse" concept, but that was definitely not the case for the original series. In fact, pretty much NO television series of that time thought in that way. It is surreal that MODERN television viewers just assume that tv shows that were produced before they were even born used this mindset. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.86.143.140 (talk) 09:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Possible addition of the Disney Channel/Disney XD universe

A possible addition to the television could be the universes that were made and are official canon for multiple Disney Channel and Disney XD shows. More information on the universe can be read here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batman3095 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

shared universe vs spinoff shows

I'm confused, why is Star Trek listed as a shared universe? all of the Star Trek shows are spun off of the classic show they all have too take place in the same universe (or alternate timelines), a shared universe is two UNRELATED (non-spinoff) shows that are linked right? (MacGyver and Hawaii 5-0 are two non-spin off shows in the same universe). 149.101.1.117 (talk) 19:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

The Star Trek/Star Wars Discussion

Should Star Trek and Star Wars really be on the list? This is about shared universes...the two series are wholly self-contained, even if both are absolutely enormous in scope.

Star Trek comes fairly close to having true spin-offs, with Assignment: Earth being an unrealized backdoor pilot, Andromeda being originally planned after the fall of the Federation in the early design stages before this was scrapped, while Earth: Final Conflict was always completely distinct.

Star Wars doesn't even have this...it has no ties to Lucas' other works and all spin-offs of any caliber bear the Star Wars name.

I'm hesitant to delete without discussion, but my opinion is to delete these entries. I'd like to get the thoughts of others just so those who keep adding these have somewhere to be directed to when their submissions are removed. -- sarysa (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Star Trek sort of has shared connections with Larry Niven's works (due to the Kzinti), and with the Green Lantern as Vulcans with mindmeld abilities appear in it, but even then I would never say they are the same universe, as the plots are contrary to each other. 2A04:4A43:8D9F:F107:54F7:8C36:BEE5:D3FC (talk) 15:21, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Removing the Notes Section

I don't understand why there is a notes section at all, as there is already a notes column in the table. It greatly damages the article's readability, while more often than not the notes would not add lines to the row if placed in the notes column. I would like to merge the notes section back into the notes column of the table, but would prefer to get others' approval first...given how stark a change it would be. -- sarysa (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Justification for Wizarding World and X-Men (FOX Marvel) as shared universes

This is mainly directed @Rreemmett: but I welcome other responses. First of all, I'm not a troll and I have been on Wikipedia since 2005. I trying to avoid edit warring so we need to discuss these two here. As far as I can see, Wizarding World and X-Men Film (aka FOX Marvel) qualify as shared universes. The definition given in the section is "two or more", but two or more of what? Decentralized works with differing focus that are ultimately tied together.

Star Trek isn't a shared universe because all canon works share not only the name but also the general scope of Earth-centric organizations tied together. (United Earth, Starfleet, The Federation) If the Gary Seven spinoff were approved, it would then qualify as a shared universe. Similarly, Star Wars isn't a shared universe because it's united around the name as well as the struggles between the Republic/Empire, the resistance, Jedi, and Sith.

Now let's look at Wizarding World. Harry Potter's focus is on Harry Potter and to a lesser extent Hogwarts. Fantastic Beasts is set in the same universe, but has a drastically different focus...the only tie to Hogwarts being a loose one involving the protagonist's future writings. These are two distinct franchises with loose ties in the same universe.

Deadpool being distinct enough from X-Men is a bit more debatable, as it was originally conceived in the 90's as an X-Men spinoff in the comics. The other likely point of contention is the first film having X-Men characters later on. The key here is the focus: Deadpool is set in a world where the X-Men exist, but the primary focus is on Deadpool. Their presence in his film is more of an afterthought, and it may even clash somewhat with the X-Men film series canon to service the film's focus, which again is Deadpool. In my opinion, these differences in focus distinguish Deadpool and X-Men as two distinct franchises set in the same universe.

I frankly don't see why you keep removing these two. Please justify your doing so. -- sarysa (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Star Wars is definitely a shared universe; it is composed and written by multiple people, overseen by different showrunners. Its canon is now corporate. Serendi^podous 08:03, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

That description would open up a lot of things to being shared universes. That would qualify Mickey Mouse alone to be a "shared universe" because Mickey's maintained by a corporation to this day and everyone who worked on him in the 20s-40s is either dead or retired. I'm not going to delete Star Wars at the moment as I prefer discussion first, but as far as my limited knowledge of the series goes, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic might be where you could best counter my views. You could also argue that the Skywalkers, their allies and their aftermath are the distinct focus of the films...that my original stated focus was too broad. It's pretty tricky, to be honest. -- sarysa (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse IS a shared universe. It even has an entry on the animation list. Just look at the article on shared universes. That's the definition Wikipedia uses, so it should be the definition for this list. Serendi^podous 21:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I meant Mickey Mouse alone. That article only acknowledges that Mickey Mouse shares a universe with Donald Duck...but really he shares one with a wide range of characters, mostly from the old film shorts. A better example might be Little Nemo, which has had generations of different artists but I'm pretty sure does not share a universe with any other franchises. That would be collaborative writing instead. -- sarysa (talk) 14:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

[outdent] Quote: A shared universe or shared world is a set of creative works where more than one writer (or other artist) independently contributes a work that can stand alone but fits into the joint development of the storyline, characters, or world of the overall project. It is common in genres like science fiction. It differs from collaborative writing where multiple artists are working together on the same work and from crossovers where the works and characters are independent except for a single meeting. The term shared universe is also used within comics to reflect the overall milieu created by the comic book publisher in which characters, events, and premises from one product line appear in other product lines in a media franchise.

That is the cited definition of a shared universe, which conflicts with your definition. Serendi^podous 15:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

In all honesty, I was trying to emphasize the two examples I've been defending to contrast it from collaborative writing, but that does bring up an interesting quandary -- it makes Wizarding World the weaker inclusion of the two. It may end up invalidated because Rowling wrote the screenplay for Fantastic Beasts. On the other hand, though, it's a list for film and television and the films each had different screenwriters and notable changes from the books. There is also the question of whether to include Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, an original work and a collaboration. This criteria has no real impact on the FOX Marvel films, since those can be traced back to their roots to multiple authors. -- sarysa (talk) 01:20, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Sony's Marvel Universe

Should Sony's Marvel Universe be considered a shared universe? i tried to add it a couple times but it keeps getting removed.

Duncan Jones

Would Moon (2009) and Mute (2018) fit the requirements for shared universe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.46.177 (talk) 18:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Sources?

Not a single one of the examples on this list has a source. I removed over 10 so called "shared universes" that aren't actually what would be considered shared universes, having a single spin-off or a differently named sequel/prequel is not what most would describe as a "shared universe", this page needs some real expansion in terms of citing reliable sources, otherwise it's going to just end up deleted. I say the universe should be required to have its own article to prove its actually a notable example of a "shared universe".★Trekker (talk) 12:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• I disagree because you can have shared universes that aren't codified a a specific entity. All that said, I will agree that some of the listings here are suspect. I disagree with the Mark VII section under TV because while Dragnet, Adam-12, Emergency and Sierra do exist in the same shared universe by way of crossovers (even though Emergency also had an episode showing characters watching Adam-12 on TV), just because a show shares creator/producer that does not make it a shared universe. I know of nothing to link the series Hec Ramsay and the semi-SF series Project UFO to Dragnet other than sharing production company. If no one has a source to provide or can cite an episode of, say, Emergency that referenced Hec, that list can be pared way down. Also, if we're going to do this list there should be a section on shared universes that intersect with other shared universe, which is what has happened with the cinematic Worlds of DC universe having recently intersected with the TV Arrowverse. 70.73.90.119 (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Slasher Cinematic Universe?!?

I knew about the universe that unites the Freddy and Jason franchises, but not everything else. Since when? Sources? Is it for that Chucky s3 episode? They're just quotes. And I also strongly believe that it is not a big deal to have one or more spin-offs to turn a saga into a cinematic universe. D.C. 2A02:B021:10:11B4:724C:E0A:1A3E:7E8C (talk) 02:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not that it doesn't exist, it's that they listed M3GAN, which has no real connection, and Twin Peaks, which, okay, yes, that was referenced but it's hard to define if it was as a fictional location or a real place. Twin Peaks also connects to lots of other things that it would basically be impossible to keep track of if we go off of small things like that.

I'm trying to chronicle this "universe" myself actually. A major connective tissue that proves it would be Hack/Slash, which is explicitly set in a world inhabited by all these characters. The listing prior to today basically included almost nothing compared to how much really connects.

https://www.thecomicboard.com/threads/slasherverse-timeline.15222/ 2A02:C7C:467D:EF00:14A7:EDF4:8003:4FEE (talk) 15:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

All the crossovers except Freddy and Jason are comics and similar though, right? Not actual movies? I think we need to remove all the ones not actually part of the same film shared universe if it's in the film section.ZeroSD (talk) 16:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Deleting unsourced content.

There are very few references in this article so the information cannot be verified. As per WP:VERIFY, "information verifiability means other people using the encyclopaedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than editors' beliefs, opinions, experiences, or previously unpublished ideas or information. Even if you are sure something is true, it must have been previously published in a reliable source before you can add it."

Many entries seem to be added by people who believe there is a connection without any sources for the claim. I have added a request for further sources. Information that remains unsourced can be removed and I will start doing so after some time has passed. Bigar (talk) 20:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Doctor Who and..

First, this article is virtually entirely unsourced. Second, the term "Whoniverse" means something completely different to the way it's used here.

But anyway...

• Eastenders and Doctor Who cross over in Dimensions in Time.

• Blake's 7 and Doctor Who cross over with multiple details. Both Terry Nation and Chris Boucher both believed the two shows exist in the same "universe".

• Douglas Adams placed numerous references to Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy into his time on Doctor Who. And, in Nu Who, the Tenth Doctor mentions that he knows Arthur Dent.

• The four Gerry Anderson shows, Fireball XL5, Stingray, Thunderbirds, and Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons all exist in the same "universe". And, in 60s Who the common references, events are all there, eg. Kembel. Therefore tying all these shows together.

While it may seem odd for a younger viewer who only knows Capaldi, Whitaker or Gatwa, it was painfully obvious in the 60s that the Anderson shows and Doctor Who co-existed, it was obvious during the Blake's 7 years that Blake's 7 and Doctor Who co-existed, it was obvious during Douglas Adams' time that Doctor Who and Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy co-existed, and then there was Dimensions in Time. 197.87.135.139 (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

First, this article is virtually entirely unsourced. See WP:LITTER, we don't add more unsourced material simply because there's other unsourced material. — Czello ^(music) 07:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Unsourced material

While I did remove an unsourced item, and others lack them. It's not an excuse to re-add unsourced material. The WP:ONUS is on editors to find sources for finding them. If anything is removed, please don't re-add it without mentioning a source. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Universal Monsters

Shouldn't we have Universal Monsters on the list? It's one of the original examples, with a number of different works that eventually cross-over with shared characters. ZeroSD (talk) 14:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)