Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honkytonk Sue


 * 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. Tone 06:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Honkytonk Sue

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant English-language coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar (the best I see are two short mentions in two interviews in google books, but neither goes beyond a one-sentence plot summary or such). The PROD was removed without any rationale, so here we go. There is no referenced content to merge, and no valid redirect target (the author is not notable, and the topic is not mentioned in the publication in which the character reportedly appeared in). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  05:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  05:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: Too early to establish notability. Aasim 06:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Too early? It was published in the 1970s which is nearly fifty years ago now. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep There's a good account of the subject here. As it was optioned for a movie and several scripts were written, there's a fair amount of buzz out there.  It's at the low end of notability but having been published by National Lampoon is good enough for me.  Andrew🐉(talk) 10:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * How is the webpage at https://comixjoint.com/ reliable? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: I added several references to the article. Larry McMurtry discusses his movie script for Honkytonk Sue for about a page in his book Hollywood: A Third Memoir (Simon and Schuster, 2010). There are several pages in the book The Complete Book of Country Swing & Western Dance, and a Bit about Cowboys. There is also coverage of the lengthy attempts to make a Sue movie in The Arizona Republic, in a 1986 article and 1987 article. — Toughpigs (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am sorry but what we get is just a few sentences in passing, not even a paragraph, and they are mostly from the author or other involved people from the newspaper (so not-idependent/WP:INTERVIEW). And they boil to the fact that "Columbia Pictures bought the rights to Honkytonk Sue". That's it. They didn't do anything with it. The entire non-PLOT coverage of this comic is just that. I am sorry, but this still fails GNG by a long-short. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:29, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is impressive this was considered for a movie script, but the newspaper articles and book excerpts presented are one-two sentences long. This seems too little to build an article on, in my humble opinion. GizzyCatBella  🍁  07:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 12:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: There's some sources mentioned here, but it doesn't seem like they impressed other reviewers. There's also an appeal to WP:HEY, but no explanation of how the article was improved. If people could provide solid analysis of sources one way or the other, whoever closes this in a week will appreciate it.
 * Delete based on the current sources being rather weak. Is there a place this could be merged? It seems like something that could be discussed on a list much more easily than a standalone. TTN (talk) 14:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 00:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Based on WP:HEY and can be improved further. I also find it a case of Deletionism, which I personally don't support. - The9Man  ( Talk ) 06:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I don't find the deletion arguments convincing. I wonder how debates of like subject matters would go if the core contributors were hard-core comic book fans who would have access to more appropriate sourcing for something of this nature. Especially if they were even marginal feminists. The deletion argument offered here doesn't do it for me. Honkytonk Sue had a lengthy enough run, even on and off, to inspire scripts for Goldie Hawn. — Maile  (talk) 14:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is sufficiently well-sourced to pass the general notability guideline. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2020 (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.