Talk:Sumuru

Deletion? No way
Here we have a character by a very well known (though not PC) author who appeared on a radio series, six novels and two films and someone decides it's not a well known character???? (i.e. Please Keep)Foofbun (talk) 00:54, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Rewrite with focus on franchise not character
Per arguments in the AfD, this should be rewritten to focus not on the non-notable character, but on the notable franchise. Anyone up to helping with that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Piotrus: Isn't that what this article already focuses on? It talks about the novel, the films, etc. What would be different if it focused on the franchise? Toughpigs (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Name, at the very least. Should we start by renaming this to Sumuru (franchise)? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The term "franchise" is too much of a neologism and makes the topic sound like a fast food chain. The disambiguation page indicates that the character is the primary topic, as the other names are somewhat different. By doing this, we avoid the need for a qualifier, as with Fu Manchu. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * How can there be a notable franchise about a non-notable character? The only consistent element of the "franchise" is the identity of the main character. I don't understand the logic of that. Toughpigs (talk) 02:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you serious? There are plenty of franchises with non-notable characters. For example Ocean's (film series), American Pie (film series) or probably half if not much more of entries in Category:Film series. Or TV series, etc.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:28, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Notability template
I see that a couple people have been tussling today over the template that says that this article may not meet the GNG. I'm curious why the template would be needed when the deletion discussion was closed as Keep -- it feels to me like folks may be trying to "re-litigate" a discussion that didn't go in their favor. But why brood about the past? I'd rather move forward and improve the page. I added some content this evening that includes references to three books of literary/film criticism, all of them providing real-world information and critical commentary on the works.

Google Books also indicates that there's material on Sumuru in a 2014 book called Serial Fu Manchu: The Chinese Supervillain and the Spread of Yellow Peril Ideology which may help to answer the question that Hijiri88 asked in the deletion discussion: "Are there enough sources to verify and discuss, without engaging in SYNTH or other OR, the fact that this character is so obviously a racist/imperialist stereotype in the vein of her creator's other, better-known, works?" I would like to help Hijiri88 with the answer, but neither Google Books or Amazon offer a searchable preview, and the Kindle version would set me back $33 which I have earmarked for other expenses. But that's out there if anyone feels like delving into the problem.

So -- given that we have multiple RS in the article now, can we agree, for the sake of our own secret world-domination plans, that we bury our differences, remove the notability scare box, and either improve the article or leave it alone? -- Toughpigs (talk) 06:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not actually arguing that the subject is not notable (I didn't even really make a case for that in my AFD comment); I just don't think it's appropriate for someone who has been here as long as Andrew has to be repeatedly removing maintenance templates with bogus rationales like "no consensus to add this template" (behaviour for which other users have been sanctioned in the past, and about which this isn't the first time I've told Andrew off). Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 06:52, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Understood. So if Sumuru is really more of a bystander in the situation, how would you feel about cutting her loose, removing the template and working things out with Andrew in a different arena? -- Toughpigs (talk) 07:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to see the template removed by someone other than Andrew (who already showed a failure to understand the issue when claiming that the sources he dug up at the AFD proved notability) who said in good faith that they believed the subject was notable and showed an interest in building an article with proper sources. As for sorting out Andrew's issues -- I've sent him about a dozen messages on his talk page over the last two years, and multiple ANI threads (none opened by me) have failed to solve the problem; this really isn't the place to discuss it, but I've lost faith that there is anywhere on the project to discuss it. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 01:09, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. I believe that the subject is notable, and I've already added content with references to improve the article. I'll take that tag off. I'm glad that you and I agree; thanks for your thoughts. -- Toughpigs (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Such templates are usually unhelpful as they tend to stay on an article for years, being ignored by both editors and readers per banner blindness. And this instance is especially inappropriate as the recent discussion established a formal consensus to keep the topic.  I therefore support removal of the template and thank Toughpigs for their other work on the article. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:36, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I would take issue with the claim that the recent discussion established a formal consensus to keep the topic; there being no one arguing to delete, as opposed to redirecting, the article is not a formal consensus to keep or anything of the sort. Tagging something as potentially not being notable enough for a standalone article is an entirely separate issue from the recent AFD result. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Such templates also indicate that the current version of a generally notable article do not demonstrate the notability in the current version. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:19, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Shirley Eaton's Sumuru films' availability on home video
Shirley Eaton's two Sumuru films, The Million Eyes of Sumuru and The Girl from Rio, are both available on home video from Blue Underground, both on DVD (separate releases) and Blu-ray (a two-on-one release).

These facts should be mentioned on both films' respective articles; they've been missing for way too long.Malcolmlucascollins (talk) 02:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)