Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clarence Odbody


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ansh 666 07:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Clarence Odbody

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article contains essentially no information not already present at It's a Wonderful Life. If the trivial "quotes" section necessitates a separate article, here it is - otherwise this should be redirected. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, the iconic character of Clarence Odbody, the guardian angel from the 1946 film It's a Wonderful Life, also received his own self-titled film in 1990 which further adds to the topics notability and detail. The page had been stable since 2007 until an undiscussed good faith blanking and redirect on December 31, 2015, and I brought it back and am improving it with promised help by a film-knowledgeable editor. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:32, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd say keep, the character has been discussed in depth in many literary sources. There's also this, not sure what to make of that.★Trekker (talk) 11:55, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 13:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 13:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per Randy Kryn. Where Clarence is concerned, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to an extensive degree, as exemplified within Category:Fictional characters, with articles for George Bailey (It's a Wonderful Life), Mary Hatch and Mr. Potter. Clarence Odbody is, indeed, an iconic character who, in addition to being the central figure in the above mentioned Clarence (1990 film) and The Last Temptation of Clarence Odbody, receives detailed write-ups in twelve books which recount It's a Wonderful Life. Clarence's entry can certainly be expanded with specific particulars gleaned from those books but, even in its present state, it already establishes Clarence as, arguably, the most renowned guardian angel in all of fiction, with a stand-alone mention in Wikipedia's own article, Guardian angel. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:00, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * In its present state it is entirely superfluous, consisting of a summary from the main article plus a few random quotes. Contrary to a common misconception, notability does not mandate an article if the material is already completely covered elsewhere. I agree that if there's worthwhile added-value material in these books, and if someone would actually go to the trouble to insert it, it would likely  hold water. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:52, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is essentially a stand-alone page because of the 1990 film Clarence which would have more detail about Odbody's "life" as an angel. It's a Wonderful Life is set in 1945, and Clarence in 1989, so it is an addition to the named character's fictional biography. That, plus the links and book mentioned above, indicate more notability to an already notable character. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:49, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Enough in-depth coverage, as shown in above sourcing to meet WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 10:37, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to It's a Wonderful Life. I see that I'm going against the majority here, but I truly do not see what independent notability has been demonstrated for this fictional character.  Most of the sources cited by Elmidae are about the film, not the character, and nobody else in this discussion has pointed us to anything more useful.  And at least one of Elmidae's Roman Spinner's sources isn't even about the film (it mentions the character just once, and only in passing).  Also, the existence of the other articles doesn't tell us much, because Mary Hatch is even less informative than the instant article and George Bailey (fictional character) is atrocious, being written in the form of a real-person biography.  The better approach would be to merge all of these articles into a single List of characters in It's a Wonderful Life but, in the meantime, we lose nothing by redirecting this one back to the main article on the film (which, by the way, already mentions that second film in its "Spin-offs" section). As for the argument that Clarence is an "iconic character", don't most iconic films have iconic characters?  If this argument were to be accepted as correct, we would end up with separate articles for each of the main characters in almost every popular film.  And most of them would look essentially like the one here -- little more than a duplication of material from the parent article.   NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Here's the 1990 Clarence film which should have much more information to add to the page. Won't have time to see it for a couple or few days, so if anyone else has the time... Yes, most iconic films have iconic characters, sure, but It's a Wonderful Life is a top-level iconic film, [which reflects] on its [major] characters, including Clarence., are as iconic as they come. The reasons to keep the page are numerous, as pointed out by all of the positive comments above. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that you mention only Elmidae's sources in your "merge" reasoning, and not Roman Spinner's links. Roman Spinner shows the prevalence of books written about this film. All of these books very likely feature Clarence as one of the main characters, thus one of the main subjects of the book. They probably show that Clarence's character is unique in film history, at least to that point (1946). Clarence would likely be the first topic in a "List of guardian angels in popular culture", a page I'd like to see if it doesn't exist, that'd be a fun one. So, I Just wanted to point out that Roman Spinner has kindly pointed out some of the sources which very likely back up the popular and academic recognition of this character's uniqueness and notability. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for commenting. I doubt that either one of us wants to engage in an extended debate, so I'll make my response brief.  First, I have no doubt that the spin-off film can be a source of additional in-universe detail, but I don't see how that addresses the concerns raised in the nomination.  And second, when I think of fictional characters that are "as iconic as they come", I think of the likes of Sherlock Holmes, Superman, Perry Mason and James Bond.  Good ol' Clarence?  He's not in their league. Thanks again for the comment.  Have a happy holiday season.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:24, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. You're quite right. I really did intend to identify Roman Spinner's post.  I'll correct that now.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and best holiday wishes to you and yours too. And you are quite right, he's not as iconic as the top-tier iconic characters. I got carried away there, and will strike the language. He's pretty notable though, and of angel characters in film, especially the subclass of guardian angels, he, among them, does seem to be of iconic status (or at least the character seems to be notable enough for the page to stay). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:48, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If I may hammer a bung into this barrel of Iconic good cheer... the point here is not whether a character is more or less iconic than Bogey or Mary Poppins, but whether there is relevant material to present about them that is not yet covered in the main article(s). That has not yet been demonstrated, and the supplementary sources noted above indeed seem to all just cover the film in its entirety (very likely all saying the same things, too). Clarence Odbody offers no added value, and there's no indication that is going to change. Can one of you proponents present an example of an in-depth treatment of the character that one could mine for such? -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:15, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The presentation of the book sources will add to the page and the notable character. And because of your post I just watched the 1990 Clarence film which adds information not covered in the main article to both the back-story and biographical material about the character. And realize that there are thousands, maybe tens-of-thousands, of Wikipedia articles about film, anime, television, comic book, and video-game characters who don't have close to the amount of sourced material that this page has. You say that the books Roman Spinner links very likely all say the same things, but since we haven't researched them, time limited by the Christmas season and all, there are likely many nuggets of information in there. What's also important is that compared to the many other character pages accepted as Wikipedia articles, especially those about fictional film and television-based angels and guardian angels, this page's topic is both more notable and well-sourced. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Since Wikipedia is our source for all seasons, we'll lay aside the question of whether Christmas is the proper time to deny Clarence his iconic guardian angel position in fictional history. It may be noted, however, that among the four central characters, George Bailey (It's a Wonderful Life), Mary Hatch and Mr. Potter have had no existence outside of It's a Wonderful Life, while Clarence has gained a wider horizon. Although best known for being portrayed in It's a Wonderful Life by elderly character actor Henry Travers, redirecting Clarence Odbody to that film would overlook and diminish his standing as the title character in 1990's Clarence where he appears as a much younger guardian angel in a storyline independent of It's a Wonderful Life. Added to the fact that John Jughead Pierson's 2011 novel, The Last Temptation of Clarence Odbody (which, for one day six years ago, had its own Wikipedia article) also places him as the title character, it becomes clear that Clarence is a notable fictional entity in his own right, separate from It's a Wonderful Life, and has earned a place among Wikipedia articles based on his own merits. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 17:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep although I have to question including a listed birth date as this article does, at least in the manner it is done there. Also have to admit I have added my own spin to the general corpus of "It's a Wonderful Life" related-fiction. Although to be fair, the way I did it gave short shift to Clarence. What we really need is someone able to find the 12 or so books Roman Spinner links to above, and link in important information from those books into this article. It is clear that there is scholarship out there, now it needs to be integrated into this article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.