Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glossu Rabban (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 List of Dune secondary characters. Overall consensus is to redirect, If anyone wants to Merge i obviously suggest discussing on tp (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:52, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glossu Rabban[edit]

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

Long unreferenced article, with only discussions of in universe plot details (and citing the fiction). Also, no claim to WP:N Last AfD discussion ended in no-consensus, without subsequently referencing or improvement to cover real world content. Sadads (talk) 18:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:52, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glossu Rabban is much better represented in literature as "Beast Rabban", the title he is known by in the book and other works, even though they document Glossu as his given name. Looking through things, I've been able to find a few mentions of him, but lots of these seem trivial, or mention Rabban solely in the context of his family members: [1][2][3][4][5] As such, while I think it would be reasonable to keep a separate article on Beast Rabban, it might make more sense from a notability standpoint to merge some of the content into List of Dune characters where all he (or most entries) has is a link to this article. Jclemens (talk) 03:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jclemens: I'm also okay with a merge, but wasn't fully convinced that list is the best place to merge so much information (it seems to not be focused on full discussions of the characters). Is there a better way to merge? Could we merge all the articles about Rabban's family into one "family" page? Sadads (talk) 13:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For instance, could we merge them up to House_Harkonnen? Cheers, Sadads (talk) 13:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If the consensus is to merge, I wouldn't object to House Harkonnen as the target. My main beef with Wikipedia's Dune coverage is that it pays too much attention to the extended universe works, and distracts from Dune itself--you know, the one book that won any major award?--which seems to hold true with that article as well. Jclemens (talk) 16:58, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I worked up a draft List of Dune secondary characters as a destination for characters like Liet-Kynes, Glossu Rabban and Farad'n. I trimmed down and cleaned up the content from the existing articles and will seek some more sources, but I think this works.— TAnthony^Talk 03:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been meaning to do this since Wellington Yueh was merged! — TAnthony^Talk 04:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TAnthony: It would be awesome to see as many of the secondary characters in a list like that: I think there are an awful lot of plot-heavy individual articles about the characters, with not real justification of their notability through real-world sourcing. Sadads (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My only hesitation about adding too many (besides the list becoming unwieldy) is that I feel images are of great use/interest, and we can't have many images in a list like this. So while the characters I've started with are fine, I would hate to, for example, have to lose the Brad Dourif as Piter photo. And while some articles are plot-heavy, there is some great content and some characters have appeared in many works. But I'll work on it. I'm the one that created Organizations of the Dune universe, Dune prequel series, List of Dune Bene Gesserit, List of Dune Fremen and even Glossary of Dune terminology from individual articles and stubs, so I'm big on consolidating smaller articles.

I would also like to add, that as much as I understand and support the notability guidelines surrounding fictional characters, I think some allowance should be made for the situation we find ourselves in with "old" works. The fact is, the internet has created more outlets for professional reviews and analysis; every newspaper or magazine can cover anything it chooses, more often and in more detail, and get a wide audience at limited cost. PR and marketing teams push for more reviews and author interviews than ever. Old works like the Dune novels or even the 1984 film are at somewhat of a disadvantage in this regard, and what coverage exists is not necessarily available (or even indexed) online—and I'm not headed to a library anytime soon, are you? LOL. I pretty much singlehandedly improved the Game of Thrones articles Tyrion Lannister, Ned Stark and Jon Snow, and even though A Game of Thrones was published as recently as 1996 and the series was hugely popular before the HBO series, it was very difficult to find commentary on the novels until the show came out. Now, I don't think Rabban is necessarily notable enough for his own article, but there are certainly other characters who I feel have a significant impact within the series but for whom I'd be hardpressed to find praise in The New York Times.— TAnthony^Talk 15:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Dune secondary characters, where an entry for Rabban has already been created.— TAnthony^Talk 22:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Dune secondary characters per TAnthony. This article is poorly sourced and I can find nothing that would indicate notability, or allow anything beyond an in-universe plot summary to be written about this person. Reyk _YO! 13:00, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2015 (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.