Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Django (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The result was Speedy keep, nom withdrawn. No one is currently arguing for deletion. DES ^(talk) 23:18, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Django (character)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable fictional character, no sources establishing notability "out-of-universe". Does not meet WP:N. Prod removed with reason "No discussion since the template was posted. Sorry, but World doesn't share Your point." However, there still is no evidence of notability. Crusio (talk) 14:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Crusio (talk) 14:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. According to the article, this is a recurring hero who has starred in more than thirty films. Would appear to meet the general notability guideline on that ground alone. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment According not to the article, but to Stephen Prince "Sam Peckinpah's The wild bunch" Published by: Cambridge University Press, 1999 - 228 p. ISBN 0521586062, 9780521586061 (P.152). It's not my original issue, thoughts, ideas, etc. Actually I've seen only one episode - 1966 movie. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 15:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for the reference, but "Django" is really mentioned only in passing here. This hardly constitutes proof of notability for the character. An article on the series of movies would be more helpful, if sources can be found. --Crusio (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks. I had mentioned this source not to prove the notability of the subject, but to prove that he really appears in more than 30 movies, and it's not my fantasies. There's a lot of other sources in which he described in detail. So please don't distort our phrases. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but talking about "distorting phrases", who on Earth said that these 30 movies were a figment of your fantasy? --Crusio (talk) 20:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

accepted. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to article on source work -- I'd link it here, but I don't think the article mentions it. No evidence or claim of significant third-party coverage substantiated by specific citations to third-party sources. --EEMIV (talk) 17:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tarantino's cover is not significant?? Well... -- SerdechnyG (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I suspect that you wanted to link to a different "Tarantino"... And I don't really understand what you mean with the previous comment either, I'm afraid. --Crusio (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sukiyaki Western: Django. Clear? -- SerdechnyG (talk) 19:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, not clear, I think. I guess you meant Quentin Tarantino and you are referring to him playing a role in the "Sukiyaki Western", but what does that have to do with this debate? --Crusio (talk) 20:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No comments. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An iconic spaghetti western character, and with so many films featuring the character we can surely have an article here.--Michig (talk) 08:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Number of films is not the main point to keep. Much more important that the character, Django was portrayed by at least seven notable actors, and not only in italian or american movies. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 09:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - A notable character appearing in Italian, English and Japanese films over a period of 30 years. Django is an important part of the Spaghetti western genre and enough scholarly work exists to support having a separate article. Take for example this book. Some twenty pages and one full chapter ("i was away, too far away") are allocated to discussing Django's role in the spaghetti westerns. And there is a whole book devoted to the study of the character (along with two others). Along with Man with No Name and Santana, he is one of the most well known spaghetti western characters. And he is a part of film studies curriculum in many college courses--Sodabottle (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn Given the sources that have been found by several of the above editors, I withdraw my nomination. I hope those sources will not only figure here but will be included in the article. I still think that an article on the series of movies instead of the character would be more useful, but such does not seem to be the consensus here. As there are no other "delete" votes, this AfD can be closed. --Crusio (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on a few hours. I will present you a few more proofs of notability. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 18:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

keep. Wikipedia has load of articles about fictional characters, so clearly there cannot be an objection in principle to having articles on fictional characters. This character appears in lots of old films shown on mainstream TV in England. There is no reason why the article cannot be developed to become a good article.--Toddy1 (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources found and withdrawal of nominaton. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:00, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.