Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy (King Kong)


 * 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. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy (King Kong)

 * -- (View AfD)

I think it should be deleted or merged into one article, since the Jack Dawson and Rose Dewitt Bukater articles got merged into a list. Superior1 05:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 03:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge somewhere unless there is evidence of Jimmy being notable outside of King Kong. GassyGuy 05:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep there's a difference. Jack and Rose only appeared in one movie, this guy, according to the article, appeared in the original and the remake and various merchandise. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * RE: Uh yeah in the 33 one he had a non speaking role. Not notable. Also, he isn't a main character like Jack and Rose, and doesn't even appear in the last 40 minutes of the movie. Superior1 05:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works...." King Kong obviously meets that guideline, but would Jimmy? I highly doubt you'll find him discussed as the subject rather than King Kong being the subject. GassyGuy 04:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That rule is too oppressive if enforced to the absolute. It's a subarticle of the King Kong movies, and appearing in both, the character bio doesn't really belong in either. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 07:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep even if he isn't in the end, that does not mean he is not important. Rhino131 23:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Notability (fiction) which says "Major characters in a work of fiction should be covered within the article on that work of fiction. If an encyclopedic treatment of such a character causes the article on the work itself to become long, then that character can be given a separate article." First this is not a major character and second this article does not provide encyclopedic treatment that would merit a separate article. --maclean 05:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to King Kong (2005 film). Normally I'd say merge into an article like List of King Kong characters but there doesn't appear to be one.  Eluchil404 09:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I had made one called List of characters in King Kong (2005), but it got merged into the main article. Superior1 20:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Avi 05:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable in and of itself, unimportant to parent movie article Avi 05:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There was a list of characters in King Kong (2005) here: but it was (hastily) merged to the main article after a single comment on the discussion page.  And the main article on the film simply lists the cast--no list was merged.  I would suggest bringing back the characters list, but since there are two versions of the film--and since most of the characters appear in both versions--I don't know...maybe a (non-specific) "list of King Kong characters"? Wavy G 05:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, not an important and notable character in both films. Terence Ong 15:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or redirect. He was a somewhat notable character in the movie, but at least redirect. 11kowrom 00:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR, non-notable. /Blaxthos 08:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless sourced... Addhoc 19:39, 29 January 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.