Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noodle (character)


 * 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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Noodle (character)

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

Fictional musician, member of a virtual band. She has very little stand-alone notability, outside of some PR stuff about her becoming a "global ambassador for Jaguar Racing", there is nothing significant about her. The article has no reception section. Perhaps some stuff could warrant merging to Gorillaz, but I don't see what supports keeping this a stand-alone article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Japan. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Comics and animation,  and United Kingdom.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: The members of Gorillaz are a pretty unique case in which they are treated as "real" even by reliable publications. And although the page may need work, there is already enough here to establish notability and an article. Here are some sources from the first page of Google News: DJ Mag, Mixmag , Pitchfork , Spin , Us Weekly , NME , and Guitar World . Why? I Ask (talk) 03:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * DJMAG's intereview - with a fictional character - is de facto a short story, pure fiction, and not really reliable for anything. mixmag one paragraph text reads like a press release. Same for pitchfork and spin. US Weekly is another "interview", i.e. a piece of cition. NME is a brief, few sentences coverage of a PR stunt, i.e. the fictional's character dating profile. Finally, GW is another interview. Sorry, I am not impressed, the sources are either PRIMARY (interview fiction) or don't meed SIGCOV. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Like I said, this is a special case. But the fact is that the character, whether as a "person" or as a character, has been the subject of several publications, and I was able to find them from little more than the first ten entries on Google News. And yes, some interviews from reliable publications can be used for notability, especially when they mix commentary (i.e., a secondary source) alongside the actual interview as those linked above do. My threshold for notability is if there is enough material from sources to write an article. I see that here. (I'd also recommend nominating the other three or so members to the AfD.) Why? I Ask (talk) 03:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly passes GNG.★Trekker (talk) 11:57, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - To me, it clearly fails GNG. (I could leave it at that, but it would be WP:POINT, perhaps. So I'll add that the lack of reception section seems like a big problem. If it is added, perhaps this could be saved, if not, redirect and merge are reasonable) - GizzyCatBella  🍁  17:10, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Gorillaz. Almost entirely plot summary, fails WP:ALLPLOT and lacks critical reception as a fictional character. I can see it making sense in the main article, or maybe a general List of Gorillaz characters, but not standalone. The same applies to the other characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Zxcvbnm Yeah, they don't look good: Russel Hobbs (no reception), Murdoc Niccals (reception but seems stretched from few mentions in passing), 2-D (character) (no reception). A ton of WP:FANCRUFT here, probably all should be just redirects. Well, will likely list them for their own AfDs after this one concludes, unless there is some major improvement in the meantime. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * And how exactly would deleting such a great amount of verifiable and sought after content be helpful to anyone? Célestin Denis (talk) 21:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - There is some groundwork to build a reception section from out there. The GScholar links provide a few hits like "'The Digital Won't Let Me Go': Constructions of the Virtual and the Real in Gorillaz' 'Clint Eastwood'" published in Journal of Popular Music Studies and the book Pop Music and Easy Listening, where Johnson spends well over WP:100W (an essay, I know, but a measurement I find sufficient) discussing the "techno Orientalism" anthropomorphized by Noodle on pp 18-19. Also "Virtual pop: gender, ethnicity, and identity in virtual bands and vocaloid", apparently unpublished, but worth scholarly analysis for a PhD thesis that has been cited at least four times, where Stark dedicates the entire Chapter 5 to discussing Noodle outside of the mentions in the greater discussion.  Also, GBooks gives a good hit in Chapter 9 "'Feel Good' with Gorillaz and 'Reject False Icons'" from The Oxford Handbook of Music and Virtuality where Rambarran has a 1.5-2 pg section dedicated to discussing Noodle outside the greater analysis on Noodle's part in the song.  There are multiple GNG sources that WP:NEXIST to keep this article, in my opinion, and hopefully they can be integrated at some point.  Happy Thanksgiving! -2pou (talk) 08:19, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Keep, delete or merge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Gorillaz. Gorillaz are great, but I think the character has the individual critical insight and coverage to justify. Gnomatique (talk) 00:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Gorillaz. Most of the coverage for this character is around the band in general. Once you remove some of the WP:UNDUE weight from primary sources, it would fit nicely there and cover a lot of the same ground. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge with Gorillaz For virtual characters that are notable ie Hololive or Virtual youtubers in general we need a lot more basis than this. She isn't at the level of some of the actual notable virtual characters Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 20:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge It's normal to merge members of a music group to one article. The sources mainly cover all of the Gorillaz. That could change if one of these characters decides to go solo. Archrogue (talk) 20:34, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem here is that 1. The Gorillaz article already is very lengthy and a lot of information would be lost if Noodle's article would be merged into the main article and that 2. A similar situation with the sources applies to the other Gorillaz members. Why would we merge Noodle and not the other characters? Merging all the characters into the main article would make the article a lot more lengthy than it needs to be so it should obviously not be into consideration. This was already established in the 2010 consensus where it was decided that all four character articles be kept: . Deciding to merge one character and not the others would be inconsistent. Célestin Denis (talk) 20:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep: This article is far too lengthy to be adequately merged into the main article without considerable information being lost and I think WP:SPINOFF is justified here given the length of the Gorillaz article. Deciding to delete or merge the Noodle article would likely subsequently trigger similar actions on other band members' articles which was already implied with some of the "Delete" votes. This would turn the Gorillaz article into a complete mess. Previous consensus already established my position when choosing to keep the articles of all four members: and the point still stands today. There also seems to be sufficient individual coverage of Noodle per Why? I Ask's Keep vote to warrant such an article. I would like to conclude by stating that frankly, such a move would absolutely not be helpful to readers seeking information on a particular band member. Célestin Denis (talk) 20:37, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment If this article is kept, I'd rename it to Noodle (Gorillaz), as was done in 2013. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 20:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, oppose merge to Gorillaz. I agree with Célestin Denis's arguments above in opposition to merging with the main Gorillaz article.  However, I would be supportive of merging all the band member articles into a single, dedicated article as Zxcvbnm indicated, similar to how some bands have dedicated member lists/articles, e.g. List of Black Sabbath and Heaven & Hell members. Uhai (talk) 18:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep all content but merge all Gorillaz band member articles into a single article on members of the band. BD2412  T 20:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, I don't see how merging the members into one page would benefit Wikipedia. Especially as more people access Wikipedia from mobile devices, one article with multiple infoboxes will be more cumbersome to read. Garuda3 (talk) 21:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You would get rid of the infoboxes and convert the contents to prose and/or create tables like seen on List of Black Sabbath and Heaven & Hell members. Uhai (talk) 22:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This would make the content harder to read, especially on mobile. I generally feel infoboxes benefit the reader. Garuda3 (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * For that list, most members listed already have a Wikipedia page with (you guessed it) an infobox. Why? I Ask (talk) 22:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.