Talk:J. Jonah Jameson (film character)

Raimi vs. MCU version
This article should either focus on the version of JJJ in the Sam Raimi films or in the MCU, but not both. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it should be the Raimi version. Corey2003 (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2021 (EST)
 * If it's a Raimi article (which I think it should be), the name should be J. Jonah Jameson (Sam Raimi film series). An MCU article (premature at this point as he has only made a cameo) would be J. Jonah Jameson (Marvel Cinematic Universe). IronManCap (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I’d be in favour of a split. We could draftify the MCU version and move it to the main space after No Way Home comes out. The Optimistic One (talk) 22:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That would still not be enough appearances for that hypothetical article to be moved to mainspace. With No Way Home, this character will have appeared only two times in the MCU, the first of which was only a scene. —El Millo (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I could be wrong, but from the teaser trailer it doesn't appear that he will play a major role in No Way Home either. I made the comments above back when this was still a draft (and before it was unilaterally moved), and I still don't think it was a good idea to combine the two characters. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 14 April 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, and no consensus to move the page to any particular alternative title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

J. Jonah Jameson (film character) → J. Jonah Jameson (film characters) – More appropriate. The Raimi and MCU versions are distinctly different and mostly share a single actor.
 * There's also an animated JJJ in ITSV directly adapted from the Spider-Man 1967 TV show and the 1970s Amazing Spider-Man series (which has 3 Made-for-TV films) also features a live-action JJJ.
 * It's also an addition of an "s", which is fine for plurality.
 * Otto Octavius (film character) is also a different case as its the same character with the same actor whereas JJJ is two characters with the same actor.

Pinging for more thoughts. – SirDot (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2022 (UTC)


 * There could be a standalone J. Jonah Jameson article covering his various media depictions (which helps given there's a lot of appearances where JK Simmons is still involved). I don't know if there's enough sufficient material to spinoff MCU Jameson specifically into his own article considering all he's had in terms of appearances is one supporting role and two cameos, both in completely different franchises despite being the same character, although it's very possible Jameson could be a recurring character as long as MCU Spider-Man keeps going. RebelYasha (talk) 20:35, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Per WP:MCUCHARACTERS, MCU Jameson needs atleast 3 more non-minor roles to be able to split into a new article. Are you proposing something like J. Jonah Jameson in other media? – SirDot (talk) 03:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is part of the reason why different incarnations of characters have their own articles. Having an article for dozens of variations is pointless and helps no one. I'd rather this bad article split instead. Gonnym (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't get what you mean by . Are you saying that you'd rather each incarnation of JJJ by JK Simmons had their own individual article? Or are you saying that this article was badly split from the J. Jonah Jameson the original comic book character? —El Millo (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * What I'm saying is that -if- a character is notable for an article, they should have a stand-alone article. If multiple variations of that character are notable for an article, then they should have separate articles (Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe), Peter Parker (Sam Raimi film series)). If the variations are not notable for articles, then they should not have large and multiple sections but a brief mention. This article should figure out what it is first then either split or merge into J. Jonah Jameson, but the proposed name is the worst option. Gonnym (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I am not suggesting to have the ITSV/70s series info in this Raimi/MCU article, those were a passing mention. – SirDot (talk) 03:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Perhaps a better solution would be to move this to J. Jonah Jameson in film, paralleling our Spider-Man in film article. BD2412  T 03:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That sounds pretty good actually. Then I imagine ITSV/70's are in a "Other appearances" section? – SirDot (talk) 03:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would think so. BD2412  T 03:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose as nominated, but support alternative proposal J. Jonah Jameson in film per BD2412. -2pou (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support J. Jonah Jameson in film per Spider-Man in film precedent. Also feels less clumsy than (film characters). Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 19:56, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * "In film" articles are not character articles and should not be treated as much. From my understanding they should only been used on titular characters. I guess they can change if it gets voted for but I don’t like the article not being about character per say. Jhenderson  7 7 7  23:31, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have not seen anything that said "in film" should only be used for titular characters. The traditional reason "in film" is used is because a character can have multiple film series, so to say "(film series)" does not work anymore. We had to expand the scope beyond a single film series. I get that titular characters are probably more film-focused, but I think notable supporting characters that have appeared in more than one film series can have an article under this expanded scope. It is happenstance that the same actor played the same character. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 14:54, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: This is an unnecessary vote porposal. All comic or comic book inspired characters have alternate takes of characters. Doesn’t mean we need to pluralize the character title. The same goes for Loki if he had a different title other than (Marvel Cinematic Universe) for example f.e. variants of many of the same person. Now we get editors say "in film" is a better purposal when I thought it was fine as is. I personally feel "in film" works better for characters who had titular relaunches. Not one of a supporting character.  Jhenderson  7 7 7  03:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * After thinking about this for a week, I oppose both the original and alternate suggestions. Although they are "different" characters from an in-universe perspective, in the real world they are technically still the same character, just different versions. To add on to Jhenderson777's comment above, the (film character) disambiguation does not necessarily imply that the article only covers one character, and such naming (i.e. in singular form) is the norm on Wikipedia per WP:NCPLURAL. BD2412's proposal to move this article to J. Jonah Jameson in film is also problematic, as I feel the portrayal of JJJ in other media is not notable enough to warrant a split of the comics JJJ page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * As another alternate suggestion, we simply could get rid of the MCU info and turn this into a Sam Raimi character article. The MCU version of JJJ unequivocally fails WP:MCUCHARACTERS, and you can see from the discussion above that I have been calling for this ever since this article was a draft. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:44, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If we want to apply WP:MCUCHARACTERS, we should do so in spirit. The focus on MCU is only because there are so many MCU films, but a comic book character could appear in MCU and non-MCU films, as what happens here. Really, this character has appeared in five major Spider-Man films. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Both of his MCU appearances were in extremely minor roles, which is why I don't see how it is notable for a split. On the other hand, the Sam Raimi version has been universally acclaimed, so an article about him is justified. It's the same reason why Joker (The Dark Knight) has his own page despite only appearing in one film, while Draft:Bruce Wayne (The Batman film series) was declined because he's not notable enough for a split. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose Part of this relates to Naming_conventions_(comics) which is pretty clear about distinguishing incarnations between publishers ... of comics, but I think this can be extended to include comic-related films. Practically, you'd have one article for Marvel and a second for Sony.  From a content continuity point of view, the Marvel content would be merged into J. Jonah Jameson which could be renamed to J. Jonah Jameson (Marvel), with another article for J. Jonah Jameson (Sony) (or another publisher if Sony is not the right one).  Regards --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 19:20, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks I see it know but I think that when I first edited this article months his mcu version info box wasn't there that's why I kept re editing it. CR7Selawi (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

"J. Jonah Jameson (Raimi-Verse)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._Jonah_Jameson_(Raimi-Verse)&redirect=no J. Jonah Jameson (Raimi-Verse)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Move spoilers away from leading text and into relevant subsections
As of this writing, the leading text (before any subsection) contains a lot of plot spoilers for most films discussed. Besides being spoilers, most of this information is superfluous and too specific, and shouldn't be in the leading text anyway, perhaps not even in the article at all (as it seems to just tell the reader the plot of the movies without encyclopedic value).

Per WP:SPOILERS, text that contains spoilers should be under a heading that implicitly serves as a spoiler warning, such as "Plot" for a work of fiction, or maybe "Depiction in the films" in this case. I think it would be even better to have separate sections for the original film series and for the MCU films.

--NeatNit (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No, in accordance with WP:SPOILER, Wikipedia doesn't censor spoilers. Readers are expected to stay away from Wikipedia articles if they wish to avoid spoilers. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @InfiniteNexus These are the most relevant parts of WP:SPOILER (emphasis mine):
 * Wikipedia previously included such warnings in some articles, but no longer does so, except for the content disclaimer and section headings (such as "Plot" or "Ending"), which imply the presence of spoilers.
 * When including spoilers, editors should make sure that an encyclopedic purpose is being served. Articles on a work of fiction should primarily describe it from a real-world perspective, discussing its reception, impact and significance.
 * The spoilers in this article are not under such an implicit-spoiler-warning heading, and I think they do not serve any encyclopedic purpose. It's pretty much a retelling of these movies' plots, barely making an effort to connect this information to this character (the topic of this article).
 * --NeatNit (talk) 11:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think that's a misinterpretation of WP:SPOILER. Wikipedia previously included such warnings in some articles, but no longer does so, except for the content disclaimer and section headings (such as "Plot" or "Ending"), which imply the presence of spoilers. is not saying that articles must use section headings as spoiler warnings. It is clarifying that although some may argue that section headings such as "Plot" function as spoiler warnings, the inclusion of such headings does not contravene WP:SPOILER. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @InfiniteNexus Okay, but what about the second point? NeatNit (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the lead section is to summarize each section of the article. One of the sections in this article is, so the lead needs to provide a brief summary of that. This is so readers can have an overview of the article subject before reading on. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the lead section is to summarize each section of the article. One of the sections in this article is, so the lead needs to provide a brief summary of that. This is so readers can have an overview of the article subject before reading on. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for how to fix this article
Look, this article doesn't work as is. It mashes two different characters from two different film series whose primary similarity is that they share an actor. We have multiple other characters spanning several film series, like Quicksilver or Mr. Fantastic, that we don't have combined into one article because they don't share an actor. But I don't think treating this as a character article will work, because it isn't one character, it's two. Forcing this into the format of a character article is currently causing a bunch of issues, right down to the name and first sentence (first sentence should say something like "J. Jonah Jameson (JJJ) is the name of two fictional characters portrayed by" and the title is also technically inaccurate). Splitting it out into two articles won't work either because the Raimi version probably fails WP:GNG and the MCU version definitely fails WP:MCUCHARACTERS.

My proposal is a new type of article to deal with this. I was thinking something along the lines of "J. Jonah Jameson as portrayed by J. K. Simmons", or a title conveying something to that effect. Then instead of being a bad character article, it could discuss all the different versions of the character that Simmons has portrayed. So it would keep most of the same information in this current article, and perhaps add information from his voicing the character in various animated works that can be pulled from the main J. Jonah Jameson article (Right now it only mentions that he voiced them in the lead section, which is technically a violation of WP:LEAD, another problem with treating this like a character article when it isn't). The infobox would have to be modified somewhat, but that's the biggest change I think.

I purposely left this here because it's a big change and the idea I have is, as far as I know, not one Wikipedia uses anywhere else. If it sticks I think there's a couple other places I think it might be useful, where an actor portrays a lot of versions of a character in different continuities (think Mark Hamill as the Joker, for example) but even if not, at least this one article could really use something like this since it's fundamentally broken in its current state. Let me know what you guys think. Like I said, I'm not particularly stuck on the name or anything, so if you have a better idea please feel free to share. Ladtrack (talk) 06:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I do believe, along with all the other comments above that addressed similar concerns regarding this article, that a split is in order and the most adequate procedure to undertake here. This article should not combine two different adaptations into one, especially since they are not directly related other than being played by the same actor. It feels rather forced to pair these two distinct portrayals together, and any multiverse connections that may have been thought of back when this was a draft do not merit retaining this combined article when, from a real world perspective, these two are unrelated. We should not refactor this into some weird set index article of all adaptations played by Jameson, as others have pointed out, there is not enough to warrant splitting that content from the main JJJ comics page. Rather, this article should solely focus on the Raimi film series version and the MCU material should be moved to Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe: A–L instead. I am concerned about this article's lack of reception for the Raimi version, though there is definitely enough sources out there to justify this article on that version, we would just need more sources and material added to cover that. Pinging other editors previously involved to better gauge perspectives. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll always be in favor of not merging different things into the same article just because they share some simple aspect. In this case, the same actor playing the same character. Different film series, different decade, different director, different-ish production companies. Gonnym (talk) 17:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Look, I get why you're saying that, I do. Splitting was my first instinct too. But in this case I think there's a lot to lose that way.
 * First, I don't think that the Raimi version has the sources to justify a standalone article. Of every source currently cited in this article, there is one singular source that has content that is actually is about Raimi's Jameson, and like four others that aren't about Raimi's Jameson but can be used for explaining the comic character or mentioning Simmons reprising the role elsewhere. That's not enough for an article. Unfortunate, but that's what happens when the character is a supporting character in a pre-MCU and pre-Nolan film series.
 * Second, pushing all this stuff to the MCU character page will mostly make it focus on in-universe information, with a bit about Simmons reprising the role but with none of the depth of this article. That's a problem because the MCU Jameson's importance isn't really about his actual role in the movies. His total role is a cameo in Far From Home and being like the twelfth most important character in No Way Home, so normally this would be considered basically a minor supporting character. The actual worthwhile stuff, which this article discusses, is that Simmons reprised his role from a previous non-MCU film, that he was at that point the first person to have ever done so, and what this meant for the MCU (multiverse, as it turned out), and what this means for the legacy of Simmons's portrayal in the Raimi films. Most of this information couldn't comfortably fit elsewhere if the article was split, even if the Raimi version did get a standalone article, because it doesn't fit there, it doesn't really fit properly in the in other media section of the comic book article, and it's too much for the MCU character page. But it's good information, and it would be a shame if Wikipedia lost it.
 * Take another example where there isn't something like this to see what I mean. I'm gonna use Mark Hamill's Joker as an example here again. None of the incarnations he has portrayed - the DCAU version, Arkham, Injustice, etc. - individually have enough written about them to justify a standalone article, and most of them aren't in works with character pages. But, between them, there is enough written to support an article, and a lot of that notability is because of Hamill's reprising his role. But since we don't have a unified article, none of that information exists on Wikipedia because there isn't a good place for it. This article is the same deal. I think that between J. K. Simmons's two major portrayals, there is enough written about them to justify having an article of some sort. If the article was split, much of that information would just be gone. I know my idea is weird. But I think it has some merit, because while this article is conceptually broken, I like a lot of the information on it and I'd hate to see it gone. Ladtrack (talk) 22:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We're not going to introduce a composite article of multiple different adaptations of a character that only have mild connectivity in the same actor and comic character. That's not how these articles are made, and as others have pointed out, I don't think there is enough to warrant splitting off all JJJ in other media adaptations into a separate article. As I've explained, we can always find more sources to support notability of the Raimi Jameson (as there are plenty out there covering his role, which is iconic), compared to the more recent MCU version which is not related to that one at all. Wikipedia also does not focus too much on in-universe details, anyway, as we primarily focus on material from a WP:REALWORLD perspective to avoid WP:FANCRUFT, so your Hamill Joker suggestion/comparison does not hold much weight here. The MCU-specific details can be covered at that specific section for that version where it is more appropriate and the information can be easily cutdown to avoid an overabundance of FANCRUFT there (which is a wider issue). The MCU version doesn't merit an article, though the Raimi one does should the coverage be expanded upon. That is key here, rather than trying to force what would essentially refactor this into a set index article, which is not what character articles are to be used for. I just don't see your suggestions passing Wikipedia standards for articles. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)