Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Arbuckle


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. An aside, but it's a surprise to see this character called "supporting". Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Jon Arbuckle

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fictional supporting character from well-known comics. Reception in the article is limited to a blog listicle, development is a bit more serious with one sentence of relevance, that the character is "an author surrogate". My BEFORE shows passing mentions but no SIGCOV. I suggest per WP:ATD-R redirecting this to the List of Garfield characters, with perhaps some merger since his entry there is just a single line. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  08:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG here are some sources with SIGCOV &mdash;siro&chi;o 09:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, but which of those source has anything but passing mentions of the character? I see WP:SIGCOV failing all around. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:29, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Did you not have access to the solrad.co (4th) one listed? If you did read it, I'd appreciate a more through rebuttal of its RSishness. Jclemens (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I found a large amount of SIGCOV in all 4 sources. Here are some examples, not exhaustive. Note that I make efforts not to risk copyvio, so I can't reproduce the entirety of the work here.
 * Abate 2017 Inks:
 * Vosen, ed. Vanatta, 2012 Chuck Klosterman and Philosophy:
 * Uidhir, 2013:
 * Palevsky, 2021, Solrad, a majority of the piece is dedicated to the character, including an in-depth analysis of the character's faith. Here's a bit from the conclusion:
 * &mdash;siro&chi;o 04:15, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources brought up by (+ the Grunge article) seem sufficient to me to establish notability. Interesting that a lot of light shed on the character by secondary is derived from Garfield Minus Garfield, and therefore an appearance of the character based on but beyond the original comics. Which is another reason not to redirect to List of Garfield characters. Daranios (talk) 12:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The additional popularity of the character in "Garfield Minus Garfield" has definitely put him over the edge to notability in my view. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources above are enough to pass GNG in my opinion. Rhino131 (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep This is an incredibly well known character. I'm suprised that a WP:BEFORE didnt bring up enough to deture this nom.Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - The current reception section in the article is terrible, but unlike most of the other characters in the Garfield franchise, Jon does appear to have enough coverage in sources that a decent article could be developed that goes beyond in-universe plot information and ref-bombing style cherry picked quotes. I think the sources provided above are sufficient for actually justifying having this one be its own article rather than just being covered in the List of Garfield characters. Rorshacma (talk) 04:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Ample coverage about this character.  D r e a m Focus  10:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep there is convincing coverage to pass the WP:GNG. The article needs work, but deletion isn't appropriate here. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. I can see the writing on the wall, but I'll dissent and not withdraw this, as I am not convinced the source stabilish notability for him separate from Garfield Minus Garfield. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:54, 30 November 2023 (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.