Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenny Curran (2nd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus to delete. W.marsh 14:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Jenny Curran
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Disputed Prod by IP who removed it twice without explanation and no changes made so the issue moves to AFD. Prod was issued for notability reasons - not meeting the criterias. I remain neutral on this case about a fictional character in the Forest Gump movie, though maybe a merge or something can be made JForget 01:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article offers nothing more than plot summary, which is not what Wikipedia is for. There's been little to nothing said about the character in secondary sources independent of the film. The character isn't notable enough to have her own article. --Hnsampat 01:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:FICT. No sources indicate notability beyond the film itself. --Dhartung | Talk 02:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep suspect it could be made into a viable article but as it stands it doesn't argue very strongly for itself. However, many ghits for jenny forrest that are not merely lists, and some news hits on jenny forrest gump like, , . JJL 03:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's because she's a character in the highly notable film Forrest Gump. However, that does not mean that she is notable on her own. --Hnsampat 05:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, each of those news articles listed only mentions Jenny in passing. None of them are about Jenny. Characters like Dirty Harry, Darth Vader, and Tony Soprano all have separate articles because they've eached received significant coverage in secondary sources. Jenny from Forrest Gump has received no such coverage and hence should not have her own article. --Hnsampat 12:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge possibly to Forrest Gump or an article about characters in Forrest Gump. I agree that the character in not notable individually, but since the film is notable, I think we should merge. Chris!  c t 06:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Jenny is a major enough of a character in the book/film that she can hold her own article.Balloonman 07:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Major character in an exceedingly notable film. GlassCobra 08:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. The character must be notable on her own, regardless of how important her role is in the film. Furthermore, there is nothing in this article besides plot summary and there is nothing that can be added, as there has been no overage of the character in secondary sources independent of the film. --Hnsampat 16:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as original CSD nominator. Adds nothing notable, only regurgetates the plot again.  Plot elements might be mergable into the film article, which suffers from too short a plot as is. As a side note, all other character articles except the one for Forest himself are currently up for PROD and so far this is the only one to be contested.  All were nominated for CSD after discussion in the Wikipedia Film Project where the consensus seemed to be that only Forrest's article was notable enough to stand on its own. Collectonian 09:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with article Forest Gump if independant reliable sources can't be found. The character isn't notable enough by itself to have its own article. AngelOfSadness  talk  21:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge. The film and book are notable, this character isn't. Crazysuit 02:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:FICT. Doctorfluffy 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - user indefinitely blocked as disruptive sockpuppet. — xDanielx T/C 21:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions.   —Quasirandom 20:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: That's right, we must delete this trivial article that's only useful to a few thousand people in order to save electrons. Remember, save those electrons, they're more important than you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.148.100 (talk) 18:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Would I be out of place in pointing out that the above IP user has added that same comment verbatim to over 50 AfD discussions today? --Hnsampat 21:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Probably merge but it definitely needs referencing if it is kept.Red Fiona 18:32, 9 November 2007 (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.