Chance
Having slept on it I think I might have been a little hasty in removing the PROD. It probably had more to do with a "cute little animal" reflex and the fact it relates to where I live than any real notability. It probably shoud be deleted. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 07:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I love you. Rodhullandemu 00:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
GANGS
Thank you for your thoughtful clarification. I have no stomach for doing anything with the wiki gang for now but will keep in mind the information. If and when such time arrives where i attempt to go thru such an ordeal again I will ask for your assistance. But...I doubt this will be anytime soon. Thanks again. Stevonmfl (talk) 10:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Stevonmfl (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- I understand your reaction. I hope you do decide to come back sometime. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
For the record:
From Stevonmfl
For the record and maybe more as it is important to keep insults credited correctly here as this seems to be a favored method of operating, the above discussion by Smatse is NOT CREDITED CORRECTLY. To wit: "...It was clear that Stevonmfl was in the wrong pretty quickly. Comments like "Maybe you're just not used to people who aren't bowled over by your "expertise", but I'm not some grad student or TA who is required to scrape and bow to you"[1] don't really help us to have civilised discussions." In fact, the above comment on being "bowled over" was actually uttered by Nightshift36 as an insult to me. Smartse assumed it was me and I was blocked like a child. Maybe you need to ask yourself why you made such an assumption. At any rate, I am too used to these kinds of "mistakes" and suffering the repercussions from same and wish you all well. Have a white day.Stevonmfl (talk) 11:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC) Stevonmfl (talk) 11:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Elen for being honest and above board. Stevonmfl (talk) 20:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I understand the reasoning behind the multiple-posting-as-spamming guideline. In this case, my intent was to corporately respond to the several editors who ganged up on me without addressing each of them individually. But thank you for the advisory. Stevonmfl (talk) 10:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Please know how little I value your input so save your painted nails.Stevonmfl (talk) 01:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the note about Talk:Fivefold ministry. I figured it was a typo. Regards.-- Chonak (talk) 18:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thought I reverted the curse words added to Alfred Nobel, didnt know I re-added them. Thanks for the heads up. Ono (talk) 01:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Regarding Annabeth (Percy Jackson)
Hello! Please note that in this case WP:BK doesn't solely apply, as the character will also be the lead female role in a film. Anyway, after doing a Google News search, I have started to incorporate some of these sources into the article, and respectfully ask that you reconsider so we can continue to revise the article based on the actually considerable reviews, previews, and interviews available. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 07:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Notability is not inherited - the fact that the character is in a notable book does not make the character itself notable. The fact that the character (unsurprisingly) features in a film of the notable book still does not make the character notable. Perhaps an example would help - the female lead character in the book Twilight has come in for some considerable discussion, mainly on the question of whether she is an appropriate role model for teenage girls. Find something like that for Annabeth and you will convince me that the character has notability.Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:40, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Would you be open to a merge of the referenced material to a character list as a compromise? I just did a search on Academic Search Complete and there's a number of reviews on there that aren't always picked up in the Google News search. Anyway, expect some more out of universe information added to the article momentarily. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:13, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- If you merge everything it would swamp the other article, but completely rewriting it down to a paragraph or so, especially with references wouldn't. Whether that would then be edited subsequently is I suppose a risk it would have to take. I cant see anything of merit in the article as it stands, so I would have to leave any rewrite to someone more familiar with the workElen of the Roads (talk) 18:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- We could at least merge the references about who is playing her in the film to Percy_Jackson_film#Film_adaptation. If you notice in this article, the casting information is unreferenced, so we can at least carry that information over. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Do that then. Elen of the Roads (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for keeping an open mind. One quick note though, per the GFDL, if I merge anything, then the article's edit history cannot be deleted, so we would have to redirect the article rather than outright delete it. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:53, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- I actually think that setting up a redirect would be a good idea in this case, although I don't think that the edit history will edify anyone :) Elen of the Roads (talk) 19:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's a requirement when we merge. Anyway, though, I have been finding some stuff in interviews where the author discusses the characters or previews of the film that compare the character with Hermione Granger from Harry Potter. Perhaps if we trimmed the summary stuff to be more equal with the new material I added, we'd have a more balanced article. I don't know if there's a Percy Jackson wikiproject, but perhaps if there is seeing if anyone from there can help would be great. I am better at adding than condensing. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Do that then. Elen of the Roads (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- We could at least merge the references about who is playing her in the film to Percy_Jackson_film#Film_adaptation. If you notice in this article, the casting information is unreferenced, so we can at least carry that information over. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- If you merge everything it would swamp the other article, but completely rewriting it down to a paragraph or so, especially with references wouldn't. Whether that would then be edited subsequently is I suppose a risk it would have to take. I cant see anything of merit in the article as it stands, so I would have to leave any rewrite to someone more familiar with the workElen of the Roads (talk) 18:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Would you be open to a merge of the referenced material to a character list as a compromise? I just did a search on Academic Search Complete and there's a number of reviews on there that aren't always picked up in the Google News search. Anyway, expect some more out of universe information added to the article momentarily. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:13, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Outdenting before the indents get silly... I must admit I disagree with a some of the discussion re notability of fiction here, which argues that the author's opinion has lower value than a third party. I think if someone has bothered to ask the author a question about the character in an interview, then you are moving quite a long way towards notability. A controversy over whether A actress or B actress is better suited to play the character also helps. You might rescue this thing yet.
- Thanks! I hope so. Incidentally, I've been working on a User:A_Nobody/Inclusion_guidelines#Table_of_notable_fictional_universes to try to determine which fictional universes go across multiple media and especially which ones have their own wikis, or better yet print encyclopedias devoted to them. If I left any out, you are welcome to add them. :) Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- I saw it. I may add to it. I think it's a shame that no-one who was interested in the article before the AfD had a crack at rewriting it, but I think you've probably done enough to save it. Hopefully a useful effect of User:Ikiplisting the AfD on the talk pages of all the other spinouts will be to encourage the editors there to do a similar improvement.Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Believe me, I wish more effort would go into improving articles prior to AfDs. Generally speaking, I would much rather improve articles prior to their coming to AfD, but as a member of Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, I always am in the process of trying to rescue some article under discussion that I rarely have time to focus on articles that are not under discussion aside from some of those for which I earned DYK credits that are mentioned somewhere in User:A_Nobody#Barnstars.2C_cookies.2C_smiles.2C_and_thanks (I probably need to split that off from my userpage!), but hey, in the future, if you ever wonder if an article has potential before nominating, do not hesitate to ask me if I can do anything with. If I can, I will gladly see what I can do and if I don't think I can rescue it, I'll gladly say as much as well as was the case with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laws of compression. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- I will do. I'm not one for madly deleting everything, and I would not like to see something potentially useful or interesting go to the wall just because I can't find any sources for it.Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Believe me, I wish more effort would go into improving articles prior to AfDs. Generally speaking, I would much rather improve articles prior to their coming to AfD, but as a member of Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, I always am in the process of trying to rescue some article under discussion that I rarely have time to focus on articles that are not under discussion aside from some of those for which I earned DYK credits that are mentioned somewhere in User:A_Nobody#Barnstars.2C_cookies.2C_smiles.2C_and_thanks (I probably need to split that off from my userpage!), but hey, in the future, if you ever wonder if an article has potential before nominating, do not hesitate to ask me if I can do anything with. If I can, I will gladly see what I can do and if I don't think I can rescue it, I'll gladly say as much as well as was the case with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laws of compression. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 22:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- I saw it. I may add to it. I think it's a shame that no-one who was interested in the article before the AfD had a crack at rewriting it, but I think you've probably done enough to save it. Hopefully a useful effect of User:Ikiplisting the AfD on the talk pages of all the other spinouts will be to encourage the editors there to do a similar improvement.Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Annabeth AfD
This whole discussion is going nowhere. Seriously, stay cool. You are questioning the notability of the second most important character of Amazon's top selling book? Pmlinediter as 203.88.10.131 (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- You are not getting it, are you. I am not saying *anything* about the merits or otherwise of the character. I've not read the books, I have no comment on whether the character is interesting/well written/challenging or whatever.
All I am asking is "Does the character have notability as defined by Wikipedia" - which is a strange abstract definition requiring sufficient secondary verification from reliable published sources to establish that a topic should be in the encyclopaedia. The original article was sloppy - the talk page shows that even you could see that, and it made no effort to cite any sources at all - even primary ones. The first two reviews I looked at didn't mention the character (I don't know why, but some of the ones you cite don't either), which didn't bode well for notability either.
Work has been done on it. You (and User:A Nobody and others) may have brought it up to scratch. I expect now that the consensus will be for keeping. But until there is a guideline that says "Leading characters in notable books are automatically notable" in the way that footballers become notable as soon as they play with a professional club, it is still necessary to demonstrate the notability of book characters the old fashioned way.
- Interesting point you make here:"Leading characters in notable books are automatically notable". Well, that's how it should be. I don't really think that jumping to an AfD is really the correct step. You are also not following some of the AfD guidelines like staying cool and averting sarcasm. And AfD is not a place for deciding whether an article is notable or not. You don't start an AfD to delete an article without even a notice. Will post more later. 203.88.10.132 (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe that is how it should be, but it's not how it is at the moment, and that is rather the crux of your problem, because that is exactly what the AfD is determining - whether the topic has sufficient merit to warrant inclusion in the encyclopaedia, given the hoops outlined above that any topic must jump through. Wikipedia notability is not connected to whether you or I believe something is notable - only to whether the editor can demonstrate with secondary and tertiary references that the topic has notability.
The AfD discussion has been extremely instructive - I can see why the policy as it stands is not necessarily the easiest to use where fiction is concerned. Learned journals often review new scientific theories in depth, teasing out all the components. There is no equivalent process by which an author's works are examined until they become exceedingly well known, become a set topic on a school syllabus, or one of the author's family writes it. It would be interesting to see if a consensus can be developed as to how much mention in reviews a character needs before it can be said to have acquired notability, although I suspect that the AfD will end up being closed no consensus. Out of interest, you noted in March 09 that it needed cleaning up before someone deleted it - never a truer word spoken, although it sadly did not prompt any action at the time. And please do point me at anything that I said that was aggressive (rather than something you perhaps did not want to hear) or sarcastic (rather than something you perhaps did not want to hear). I have throughout remained disinterested - the article as it stood was terrible fancruft and should have gone, but now that it has been cleaned up I will shed no tears if the consensus is that it stays. The most I will admit to is a little light irony - I am an Englishwoman, after all. Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)