Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vincent Vega

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 Merge (already done as far as i see) to List of Pulp Fiction characters. Tikiwont (talk) 10:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vincent Vega

Vincent Vega (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

  • Delete and Merge into Pulp Fiction. Merely recaps the plot of Pulp Fiction, provides no real world context other than unsourced trivia, could be cut down to about a twentieth of its size and merged, possibly creating a more detailed cast section, as happened to Reservoir Dogs which also had a number of seperate pages for characters.--The Dominator (talk) 21:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —The Dominator (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Is this the same editor as the one over at the AFD for Freddy Newandyke? :) I agree with your assessment. There is decent real-world context about this character and the actor who played him at Pulp Fiction (film)#Cast, so I say delete this character article on grounds of redundancy and limited scope (appearing in only one film). —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep If the nominator wants a better article then he should edit it - AFD is not cleanup. There is lots of critical commentary on this character as it is a notable part of a highly notable work. For example, see Google Scholar. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • No, there is a lot of critical commentary on the film, of which this fictional character is a part. All these academic papers are film-centric because Vincent Vega's singular appearance was in this one film. All critical commentary is thus relevant to the film as a whole with no need to preemptively spin off a separate article when the commentary can be covered in the film article itself. The fictional character does not transcend the film of his origin; the film is his entire background. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The Pulp Fiction article is 103K which exceeds the guidelines of WP:SIZE: > 100 KB Almost certainly should be divided up. Sub-articles on aspects of the film such as the major characters are therefore appropriate. Colonel Warden (talk)
  • The main article on the movie is too large, as I have already explained. Sub-articles such as this are a good appropriate place to put detailed influences such as the Batusi. How these articles are structured and their exact content is a matter of content-editing, not deletion. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree, merge it with Pulp Fiction and delete it. (Got a message inviting my opinion since I've edited the article.) Helgihg (talk) 20:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)helgihg
  • I can understand the merge part, but why delete? What is so objectionable about the article that it's edit history must go away, when the GFDL requires that it be kept? -- RoninBK T C 23:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Erik, the reason I nominated this was because I hate inconsistency on Wikipedia, if we're going to merge the Reservoir Dogs characters than we should do the same here. I think that this article provides practically nil information. 1. The plot is covered in Pulp Fiction, 2. Most of the trivia is not notable and the ones that are, are original research and can easily be merged with Pulp Fiction. The article is fairly long yes, but there is such a small amount of useful info here that it won't make much of a difference.--The Dominator (talk) 03:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Uh, no, my nomination is that I wish to have consistency on Wikipedia and this article provides no meaningful context, no sources and no useful real world info.--The Dominator (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep the major character in a major work--the actor won an academy award for the portrayal-- is notable, and can be sourced from the work itself, but additional sources can surely be found discussing the performance, which is real world context .DGG (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Check this, the performance is already discussed in the Pulp Fiction article, which is the little meaningful context this article could possibly ever have.--The Dominator (talk) 04:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and John Travolta did not win an academy award for the role.--The Dominator (talk) 04:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Merge with and redirect to List of Pulp Fiction characters (see discussion below), an article about a widely noted and significant film like this one can spin off encyclopedic articles about its main characters. I stumbled across this AfD only because I went to Vincent Vega after watching the movie (although I likely did this because I know WP has articles about characters). I would deprecate sub-articles about characters from most films, though. Further, I've seen lots of published commentary on this character which could be sourced to make a helpful article (the article is indeed a big mess now). Gwen Gale (talk) 00:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I've done some cleanup and expansion on it. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Better, but it still needs references to published sources.--The Dominator (talk) 02:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I think so too, lots of cites to published commentary and criticism about the character, which is how the article would support its assertion of notability. I think your AfD was a reasonable thought btw, it's only because this lead character is so widely cited (and the film so historic) that I voted for a keep. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
What if we made a List of Pulp Fiction characters and merged the useful info here into that one? It seems strange to me that we have an article on Vincent but not one on other important characters like Jules, Marcellus, Butch, Mia etc. etc. etc. If we made a character page we can write meaningful content about major and minor characters.--The Dominator (talk) 02:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, though I'd rather say, call it Pulp Fiction characters, since such an article would have plot recaps and cited criticism and commentary for each meaningul character, I'd be ok with a merge into something separate like that and moreover, I would be willing to work on it with other editors as a project. Again, this would be only because the film has so much sway in late 20th century cinema. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Well most film character articles are called "List of..." so I think we should go with that.--The Dominator (talk) 02:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, for consistency then... :) My suggestion would be, start the new article now and vote to delete merge this one as a lapsed fork. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree, I'll start writing down all the characters, my knowledge of the film is fairly good, so I probably won't miss many.--The Dominator (talk) 02:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:BOLD. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
These are the ones I can think of now, some are probably totally unnecessary, tell me if I missed someone: Vincent Vega - Jules Winnfield - Mia Wallace - Marcellus Wallace - "Ringo" or "Pumpkin" - Yolanda or "Honey Bunny" - Brett - Marvin - Paul the bartender - Judy - Lance - Butch Coolidge - Fabienne - Maynard - Zed - Jimmy Dimmick - Winston "The Wolf" Wolfe - Esmeralda (cab driver) - Other minor characters, Flock of Seagulls, The fourth man, Restaurant manager, Trudy, Buddy Holly, Waitress at beginning, Woman who offered Marcellus legal help, The Gimp, Bonny Dimmick.--The Dominator (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't forget Maynard (Zed's friend/pawn shop owner), also, it's spelled Bonnie. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I have Maynard. I'll start putting the article together in my sandbox.--The Dominator (talk) 03:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
yep there he is, can't think of anyone else Gwen Gale (talk) 03:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge into the proposed list. Do not delete and keep the edit history intact. Dimadick (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Yup, we won't actually delete in that sense, we'd just redirect "Vincent Vega" to "List of Pulp Fiction characters#Vincent Vega".--The Dominator (talk) 15:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I think you guys might be interested in this, I'm tagging it for deletion so we can create the character page.--The Dominator (talk) 15:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Also this.--The Dominator (talk) 15:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
If any more of these show up we can easily vote to merge on each article talk page. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope there aren't any more. This is what I have done so far: User:Dominik92/My Sandbox, I've got three characters, if you want to help let me know which characters you're doing so we don't both write the same thing.--The Dominator (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks like a helpful start to me. How about building a more or less bare skeleton with most of the character names and then putting up the article straight off? Looks to me like it'll grow and smooth out fast enough? Gwen Gale (talk) 16:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sort of afraid of it being nominated for deletion right after I create it, so I was thinking add most of the info on major characters, then just mention the minor characters to get some content, I want to at least complete Marcellus and Mia.--The Dominator (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm ready to work on it is all :) Gwen Gale (talk) 16:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm done the major characters and I'll create the article soon.--The Dominator (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I've created the article as List of Pulp Fiction characters please help improve it.--The Dominator (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2008 (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.