Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Aarons (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   keep. Merging or redirecting can be done at talk page.  MBisanz  talk 23:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Jesse Aarons
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Nominating along with Leslie Burke. Pretty much all plot summary, which would be better served at Bridge to Terabithia. Doesn't appear to have much notability outside of the book/film. Would be happy with a redirect, but nominating to get community consensus. TallNapoleon (talk) 01:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per previous nomination. Yellowweasel (talk) 02:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per previous Keep nomination. Ikip (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Notification of this AfD was added to: Bridge to Terabithia (2007 film) and Bridge to Terabithia Ikip (talk) 03:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * DeleteNo notability outside of the film, doesn't need its own article. Letsdrinktea (talk) 03:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Weak Keep More information could be added in context of the characters themselves instead of what they did in some story. Currently, this article amounts to nothing more than fancruft. Letsdrinktea (talk) 03:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Couldn't these have been bundled together? Merge, just like the others, for exactly the same reasons as the others. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 05:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge, with the main article Bridge to Terabithia- Binary TSO ???
 * Keep characters are central and subject of detailed analysis (this book and film were studied in schools I think) Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: Unless there are sources examining these two characters specifically there's no real reason for them to have their own article. Seeing as there are only two main characters what's worth keeping can easily be merged into the main article without length concerns. If they're going to get their own articles then individual notability outside the books will need to be demonstrated. Take a look at the way Snow Crash handles this, for instance, despite being a longer book with more characters. TallNapoleon (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That is a case for merging. No matter what your view on the article, the options are merging and keeping, deletion is out of the question. - Mgm|(talk) 13:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I would suggest that while this might theoretically be the case, with this article there is very little to merge. TallNapoleon (talk) 18:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * merged or not, the solution is then to write more. I don;t think anyone has made a serious try for sources yet. DGG (talk) 01:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If this article is that important to you, then make an effort to source and improve it, otherwise the information should be merged with the novel page, and this page deleted with no re-direct needed.216.211.255.98 (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep as per reasons above--Unionhawk (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per the same reasoning I used on Articles for deletion/Leslie Burke (2nd nomination) = Mgm|(talk) 13:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep per last AfD and reasons above. Consensus is clear in this case. --J.Mundo (talk) 13:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge or redirect to main article, which already summarizes the plot. The article pretty much violates WP:NOT, doesn't establish notability, doesn't qualify for a WP:SPINOUT, and no-one has volunteered to improve it to remove these major deficiencies, i.e. there doesn't appear to be any good reason to keep this stand-alone article around. – sgeureka t•c 13:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/RedirectThis article mostly just summerizes the plot, as others have said above. Remove the plot summery, and the brief character description that exists already on the Main Bridge to Terabithia page, and you are left with virtually nothing in this article. Are we going to also have articles for Walter Younger, Willy Loman, Charles Foster Kane, and Mitch McDeere? While the books and movies may be notable, that doesn't make the character itself notable, especially since he(and she in regards to Leslie) are not notable in and of itself. WildWikiGuy (talk) 22:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep the main characters should have articles. Has anyone checked the reviews of the book or the film for sources? In any case this Afd, and we have no policy at all for bringing contested merges and redirects here for a decision. Nor should we, unless we want to do twice the work--which will only result in more superficial conideration--there is already more than can be properly handled. This was an improper nomination, as deletion was not requested I note that there is no requirement that a source for notability be solely or even primarily about a subject, just that it has to be about it in a substantial. DGG (talk) 01:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect Main book article should be more than sufficient to cover this character. There's only three supporting sources anyway.--Sloane (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is an interesting character discussion about Aaron's view of Self and how this view evolves, using Jung's mandala for the psychological analysis in Deconstructing the Hero, by Margery Hourihan. There's also an interesting comparison, including a possible influence, between the Jody Baxter character of The Yearling and the character Jesse Aarons in Katherine Paterson, by Alice B. McGinty. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a point of note, both of those references you mention, are 1 use of the name in 1 paragraph in a 112 page book, and a 264 page book. WildWikiGuy (talk) 03:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Per above. EagleFan (talk) 01:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per above  D r e a m Focus  16:13, 27 February 2009 (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.