Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Cross (character)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. (non-admin closure) Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Cross (character) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

To quote myself from this recent move discussion:

As for your point about the character, I think my initial proposal already covers that; the page was for the character, but that article was deleted via AfD. Three years isn't a ton of time for notability, especially for a character whose popularity peaked decades ago. I see that [this article] exists (and that you created it), but I'm not sure that would survive a second AfD. Most of the sources in that article are about the movies/TV series rather than the character himself, and I'm not sure the ones that are about the character are reliable (especially not Passionate in Marketing, nor the reference to another Wikipedia article which I know for a fact is against the rules).

The article's creator responded to that message saying they were "sure there are many tons of reliable source about the character him self online just need a lil bit of searching", but in the handful of weeks since that comment, the only additional sources they've added are also primarily about the franchise and not strictly the character. I think the character is generally underdiscussed in these sources, and that there is still not enough material for a standalone article. I would not oppose a merger of a smaller selection of sourced material to Alex Cross, and regardless I think this should redirect there. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well if it can't overcome the sourcing issue, it shouldn't be kept. We can't just assume notability, and the franchise already has multiple other articles. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: You referenced our previous discussion regarding the move of the other page. The article's creator responded to that message saying they were "sure there are many tons of reliable source about the character him self online just need a lil bit of searching", but in the handful of weeks since that comment, the only additional sources they've added are also primarily about the franchise and not strictly the character. I think the character is generally underdiscussed in these sources, and that there is still not enough material for a standalone article.
That being said, I originally intended to do more sourcing for the article but got sidetracked with other commitments and forgot. Nonetheless, the sources currently cited in the article already meet the GNG. They do not solely focus on the movies alone; rather, they also discuss the character alongside the films or series within the same sources. Afro 📢Talk! 06:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep First, I want to clarify that I’m not a big fan of AfD discussions, and my vote to keep is not based on the fact that I created the article—I want to ensure a fair assessment. The character in question has been covered in over 40 media sources and is recognized as a fictional character for a reason.

I’m not sure what kind of sources are expected beyond those already provided, as they discuss the character while also covering the related films or novels in the same publication. To me, this is a reasonable approach. Not all fictional characters receive standalone coverage like DC and Marvel superheroes do, yet Alex Cross has been a well-established figure for over a decade. Dismissing his notability outright would overlook his long-standing presence in literature and media, for example, [1] [2] [3] they are similar characters with similar style of publications here o n wikipedia. Afro 📢Talk! 4:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

References

Redirect to Alex Cross (novel series). The article's main notability drawing statements are entirely unsourced, including the entire Legacy section, meaning this article contains heavy WP:OR. The sources provided in this discussion are from dubious sources (FromTheFourThrow seems to be a WP:WORDPRESS published WP:BLOG site, LikeADad.net seems dubious at best, and ForensicPsychologyOnline has no authors attached and seems to be an entirely promotional site). Any other sources in the article are WP:ROUTINE coverage, like announcements of the character's novel series being adapted to TV. There are also several sources that are all plot summary, which does not help with WP:NOTPLOT, including the PsychologyOnline source, which is entirely taking plot summary from a ROUTINE media announcement. I see no evidence of any actual coverage on this character that would constitute the WP:SIGCOV needed for an article, and all comments from those significantly involved with the article have been WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST arguments without any actual meat to back it up. I would need some actual SIGCOV to be shown to be convinced of this subject meeting notability. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I'm doing a search since I could swear there have been articles focusing on the character, but I can't seem to find them. Much of the coverage (via Google search) focuses specifically on the film, books, and series, without covering the character in a way that could be seen as showing individual notability. I am finding some sourcing by looking up my old college's database, but since I'm no longer a current student I don't have any way of verifying that the coverage focuses on the character. It does seem promising though. I'm including some of the most promising in the article in a further reading section, but then there are ones like this that are a bit more vague. I am leaning towards it possibly being usable given that it's similar in scope to this. It also deals with black men in film, but the author focuses more on how the character is represented as opposed to purely or predominantly on the film.
Now if sourcing is found, this article will need to be pretty much gutted. It's written in an in-universe style, is largely unsourced, and some of the content seems to be written from a fan perspective. Something I'd recommend adding would be coverage of how people have responded to a white man writing a black character - Patterson has received both praise and scrutiny. That topic could also potentially show independent notability for the character as it does focus on how the character has been written. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 14:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found some other potentially usable sources here and here. As with before, these are all paywalled and as such I can't tell how usable they might be. I've also made a couple of tweaks to the page to remove some of the fan POV - I've left the background section alone since that would need some work and also is written to be an in-universe type description of the character, so there's a bit more leeway there. Still, it needs work for the fan POV.
I am leaning towards the character being independently notable and would normally volunteer to re-write the article, but given that the majority of available sourcing is paywalled it makes it very difficult for me to do without going to a public library, which I don't really have the time to do. I also do think there's some validity in the point that the character has been adapted to multiple forms of media (film, TV, comics), so a character page could help collect information on the differences between these adaptations. Although on that note, I think that this could be somewhat resolved by making a franchise page. Currently everything is on the novel series article, which kind of makes it wonky - there's an article on the film series, but I think a franchise page could help tie everything together a bit better. That's not the point of this AfD though, but something I wanted to put out there if anyone was interested. It'd be a big project and is a bit more than I can take on myself right now, admittedly. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 14:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't stand the biography section and rewrote it to be at least somewhat more in keeping with Wikipedia's standards. I've removed some of the unsourced content such as his abilities - I mentioned that he was a boxer in the fictional character biography section. The others should be implied with the biography section. If this is kept an abilities section can be rebuilt with proper sourcing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 19:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also removed the book list in favor of a prose section. It's redundant to the main article and takes up too much room. Plus it's kind of a given that he will either appear or be mentioned in every volume of his series. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 19:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've also done an overhaul of the article and removed the bulk of promotional prose. It's not a total rewrite but pretty close to it. The article still needs a lot of sourcing to back up various claims. I'm not really comfortable with some of the sourcing - the forensic psychology source has no info on who wrote anything or who runs it. I had to go to the TOU page to learn that it's maintained by XYZ Media. Looking for info on that doesn't bring up much, most of what I'm finding is web optimization and advertising - Google says it's linked to Wiley but I see no evidence of this. The page looks like it was primarily made to link to various colleges that are sponsoring the site to promote their schools. The profiles of various forensic psychologists (one of which is Alex Cross) seems to have been written as an aftersight. It's not super up front about it all being sponsored either, which is why I personally see it as unusable. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 20:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ReaderofthePack Nice work! It was somewhat challenging to find independent, reliable sources for this character, as much of the available information comes directly from the novel, film, and television adaptations. I appreciate the effort you put into researching further. Alex is one of the most notable fictional detective characters, so I was quite surprised to discover that he doesn’t have his own Wikipedia biography. Thank you for taking the time to dig deeper. Afro 📢Talk! 06:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Willing to strike my previous vote and go Weak Keep. Article's a bit of a mess still but the cleaning by Reader has helped and I feel confident in saying this article can probably be expanded. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 12:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! It still needs a lot of work and by someone more familiar with the series/character than I am (or at least someone who can access the paywalled sources). ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 01:16, 2 March 2025 (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.