Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jubal Harshaw (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 redirect to Stranger in a Strange Land. Tone 11:35, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Jubal Harshaw
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFICTION/WP:GNG/WP:PLOT. AfD from 10 years was focused on arguments 'he appears in a notable book'. WP:NOTINHERITED. At best can be redirected to said book, but is not a likely search term anyway. But maybe someone can find a source to show notability? My BEFORE fails to find anything that's not a mention in passing (a sentence or two of plot summary about him). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

"But the real star is Jubal Harshaw, Heinlein’s crude wish-fulfillment stand-in for himself. Jubal is an aging popular writer who lives with a harem of three beautiful, brilliant young women who take turns keeping house, splashing around in the pool and serving as his personal secretaries. He’s also an unbelievable Renaissance man, displaying categorical knowledge of everything from law to philosophy to sculpture to herpetology:
 * Keep or merge . More analysis found at Pandeism: Literary critic Dan Schneider wrote of Heinlein's Stranger In A Strange Land that Jubal Harshaw's belief in his own free will, was one "which Mike, Jill, and the Fosterites misinterpret as a pandeistic urge, 'Thou art God!, citation: Dan Schneider, Review of Stranger In A Strange Land (The Uncut Version), by Robert A. Heinlein (7/29/05). More discussion of Harshaw in that piece. Appears in multiple Heinlein books. Have added this very negative Medium review too. Hyperbolick (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * One sentence is pretty much a definition of coverage in passing, GNG requires in-depth. It's a nice reference, and I suggest you merge it to the article about the notable book, which should discuss the characters. But the extent of the analysis, i.e. a single sentence, does not warrant a stand alone article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * : Would you consider the following from the Medium article to constitute more than one sentence?:
 * It was the handsomest specimen of Boidae he had ever seen — longer, he estimated, than any other boa constrictor in captivity.

We are treated to Jubal’s wisdom partly through bizarre non sequiturs like that one, and partly through monologues in which he serves as a mouthpiece for Heinlein’s political and social views — which are at best charmingly muddled, and at worst a complete chore to read. Jubal fancies himself a sort of curmudgeonly Hunter Thompson-ish libertarian, but first and foremost he’s a pedant. There’s nothing another character can say to him that won’t produce a lecture in reply, and even the faintly interesting ones tend to slide back into tired sexist stereotypes by the time he’s done. For example, here’s his response when someone compliments one of his sculptural replicas:
 * Anybody can look at a pretty girl and see a pretty girl. An artist can look at a pretty girl and see the old woman she will become. A better artist can look at an old woman and see the pretty girl that she used to be. But a great artist — a master — and that is what Auguste Rodin was — can look at an old woman, portray her exactly as she is… and force the viewer to see the pretty girl she used to be…. and more than that, he can make anyone with the sensitivity of an armadillo, or even you, see that this lovely young girl is still alive, not old and ugly at all, but simply prisoned inside her ruined body. He can make you feel the quiet, endless tragedy that there was never a girl born who ever grew older than eighteen in her heart…. no matter what the merciless hours have done to her. Look at her, Ben. Growing old doesn’t matter to you and me; we were never meant to be admired — but it does to them."


 * Hyperbolick (talk) 13:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Right, that's about two sentences worth of analysis. Stuff that is not just plot summary: "Heinlein’s crude wish-fulfillment stand-in for himself... he serves as a mouthpiece for Heinlein’s political and social views". That's the extent of analysis I see here. I am not saying its useless, it is a good find and I'd encourage adding it to the article with a reference. But it is not an in-depth treatment, and I don't think this is enough to merit a stand-alone article. Good content to merge to the book article which can discuss him in a subsection. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Would be a reasonable compromise, yes. Hyperbolick (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Stranger in a Strange Land, where the character seems adequately covered. The above sources are limited to that main appearance. The rest of the character's appearances seem to be extremely minor, two of the plot summaries not even currently mentioning him once. TTN (talk) 23:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to Stranger in a Strange Land. No reason for a WP:SPINOUT at this point, the character can be covered just fine in the article of her main appearance. – sgeureka t•c 18:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails NFICTION/GNG. Pure PLOT. Not opposed to redirect. Kacper IV (talk) 09:42, 26 November 2019 (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.