This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: American Stub‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the American cinema task force. This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed. Horror Stub‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. United States Stub‑class Low‑importance 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Megan (upcoming film) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 22#Megan (upcoming film) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Qwerfjkltalk 13:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

qweqeqewqw 101.78.26.20 (talk) 03:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should we switch back the title to M3GAN, since that seems to be the title everyone, including the filmmakers and official companies, are using? Iamnoahflores (talk) 22:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this ended up here per MOS:TITLE#Typographic effects as a WP:STYLIZED title (similar to Se7en, called out earlier under MOS:TMRULES—the page for Se7en has numerous references using the stylized title). I'm sure this is mostly due a desire to have a more encyclopedic/academic WP:TONE. -2pou (talk) 23:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, makes sense then. Iamnoahflores (talk) 23:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think we should switch to M3GAN since that's the in-universe name of the doll, it doesn't make sense to have the name Megan there otherwise just to state the obvious play on letters. I think it's more like a Menace II Society situation, and how it's not called Menace to Society on the wiki (but like with that article we could put a "pronounced as"). Iamnoahflores (talk) 00:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The request to rename this article to M3GAN has been carried out. If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using ((subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.)) and ((subst:RM bottom)) and remove the ((Requested move/dated|…)) tag, or replace it with the ((subst:Requested move/end|…)) tag.

Megan (2023 film) → M3GAN – The title is not stylization for the sake of stylization. It's the name of the fictional doll within the film AND is confirmed to be an abbreviation; it's also the only title variation used in sources and will most likely continue to be used. As mentioned above, it's closer to a Menace II Society situation than a SE7EN one. IAmNMFlores (talk) 18:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Either it wasn't known as such at the time, or I wasn't paying attention when I commented above, but if M3GAN = Model 3 Generative Android, then this seems to fall under WP:ACROTITLE. -2pou (talk) 18:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  If looking for a RS spelling out the acronym, since one isn't obvious in the article, CNET uses it here. (And looks like it wasn't known when I commented Special:PermaLink/1099228737, so I'm not taking Mugatu's crazy pills.) -2pou (talk) 18:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support since in addition to this being the official title, reliable sources seem to be predominantly using this rather than just Megan. However, if time passes, and reliable sources find it easier to write just Megan, I'd be open to restoring the article to the title Megan (2023 film). I have a little skepticism since this title will be verbalized as "Megan" in common parlance, but as long as the relevant disambiguation pages and hatnotes point to the new title, I suppose this move is fine. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - M3GAN is the title used in: Universal Pictures' official website, the movie's teaser poster, the movie's official trailer, the movie's official Twitter, the movie's official Facebook, and various other sources. Not a single official sources uses the word Megan to textually promote the movie, unless it is verably spoken. (FilmVoyage (talk) 21:04, 13 October 2022 (UTC))[reply]

  Be mindful that official printing does not mean that Wikipedia's article titles should follow suit. We have numerous films with different kinds of stylizations where the official print is stylized but that the reliable sources write the title without stylization. Seven and Alien 3 are the standard examples given. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:22, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I don't see this as controversial. The movie is about a character named M3GAN, which is a legitimate acronym in-universe, and the vast majority of sources call it M3GAN/M3gan, so "Megan" strikes me as a bit of a Wikipedia invention (which MOS:TM frowns upon). I hate to bring up WP:ASTONISH because it's often misused, but the current title really doesn't make any sense. "Megan, stylized as M3GAN, is an upcoming..." "a brilliant roboticist at a toy company, uses artificial intelligence to develop M3GAN"... ok, which one is it then? Nohomersryan (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:ACROTITLE, and those above. BD2412 T 03:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per W:NATURAL and WP:IAR. The actual movie is called M3GAN anyway, not Megan. cookie monster 755 06:18, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Check the poster folks - and Oppose STYLISM this horror movie is posterized as MΞGAN which shows that this is not going to be a helpful move. And it is pronounce "Megan" not EmThreeGan. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:07, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  We should follow what reliable sources are writing. Are you saying that such sources are writing Megan more often than M3GAN at this point? Like I mentioned above, I think it could potentially change, but the evidence I see is that both official/primary and reliable/secondary sources are writing M3GAN. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 11:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Stylizations such as this do not belong in the title. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • In this case, however, this is not a stylization. It is an acronym (even if it is a blatantly manufactured one). Unlike a "SE7EN" or a "P!NK", there is no actual "Megan" involved here. BD2412 T 19:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • By your logic, the iPhone article should be I-Phone becasue all proper nouns begin with a capital letter. (FilmVoyage (talk)) — Preceding undated comment added 04:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nomination and all of the "support" votes. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:42, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: As stated by various other users, M3GAN is the title used on various official websites for the movie, IMDB, and sources discussing it. Moreover, M3GAN isn't just a stylization of the name Megan, but an acronym for the titular gynoid's name. While Seven and Alien 3 have been brought up as examples as to why the title should be Megan, we must also remember examples like RWBY. While the show's title is pronounced like Ruby, the title is an acronym for the four main huntresses, and written and all caps, which is how it's presented on both Wikipedia and elsewhere. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment What is the film registered as in its copyright notice?★Trekker (talk) 22:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to these websites (here and also here) the film is registered as M3GAN. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support It seems to be the films official and legal name.★Trekker (talk) 12:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Pure stylisation. Everyone will call the film Megan. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just because something is phonetically pronounced one way, doesn't mean it should be spelled that way. The book (and movies) Pet Semetary is pronounced Pet Cemetary, but we don't change it because there is an in-universe explanation, and it is the real title. (FilmVoyage (talk) 06:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC))[reply]
• Support for reasons already stated above and elsewhere. MiaHarris74 (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]