Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agent Luke Hobbs

Add links
Source: 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 to List of The Fast and the Furious characters. ‑Scottywong| express _ 16:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agent Luke Hobbs

Agent Luke Hobbs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hi! I've never really done this before but I do not feel that the page in question, that for a Fast and Furious character is significant enough for the project. The page falls within the remit of an existing article, namely List of The Fast and the Furious characters where 'Agent Luke Hobbs' is covered. Full articles for fictional characters should be reserved for protagonists of the upmost importance, which I feel is not demonstrated on any page or any research SadKid01 (talk) 08:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The find sources link, especially newspapers, is replete with significant RS coverage of this fictional element: GNG is met. "not notable beyond the franchise itself" and "not an overarching character" are not valid rationales for deletion. Having said that, an editorial decision to trim and merge to the character list would not be inappropriate. Jclemens (talk) 03:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to List of The Fast and the Furious characters. While searches bring up plenty of hits on the character's name, I'm finding very little that actually talks specifically about the character in any meaningful way. They are mainly things such as reviews/synopses of the movies, in which his character is mentioned, or press releases that just announce the character's appearances in certain films in the franchise. There really are not enough sources that talk about Hobbs in any depth that would justify having a separate article for the character, though there is enough out there that a Merge would be appropriate. 64.183.45.226 (talk) 15:50, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Non-trivial character. He's gotten tons of press over the years. Tons of sources and information on the character. There are Wikipedia pages for much more obscure characters. Right now there is a Gisele Yashar page that we should be proposing deletion for, not Hobbs. I'm all for expanding our coverage of the franchise, as it's pretty thin at the moment, but doing so one step at a time. A Hobbs article is the correct step to take right now. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 00:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Other stuff exists" is not a valid reason. The coverage on the character are not about the character exclusively, therefore all valuable information should be merged into a list.★Trekker (talk) 12:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I don't have a doctorate in Wikipedia policy, but I thought that Wikipedia would and should pride itself on non-bias consistency. And I find it hard to believe that a character like Lord Farquaad would have more sources talking about him than somebody like Hobbs, who is a pivotal and much discussed character in one of the biggest film franchises ever. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 18:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nikki Lee 1999: I would suggest looking for sources that show that this character has received a significant amount of coverage from third-party, reliable sources in order to fully support your keep vote. Having sources that could be used to construct a section on the character's reception or the character's casting, development, and characterization and either listing them here or putting them in the actual article will help to support your argument. Pointing to other articles on other characters and questioning why they exist does not help your case (which you have already done twice) and is irrelevant to this discussion; I would recommend you avoid this strategy in the future during this AfD and other AfDs. I understand that this character is a major figure in a large media franchise, but it would still be more helpful to spend your time locating sources to support your case. Just trying to provide some constructive advice; if you can do that, then I would be more than happy to change my vote to keep. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here are some sources to potentially start with that includes some more behind-the-scenes/production information and reception stuff (1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6) so there could be potential for this. I would recommend you (or anyone else interested in this article) look for more though. Again, just trying to be helpful. I think the primary question is whether or not this character has enough coverage for his own page or if all of the information could safely put in the list article. Aoba47 (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 22:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This fictional character is noteworthy, and part of one of the most successful film franchises in history, personal distaste for the franchise notwithstanding. If the relatively minor Star Wars franchise character General Grievous gets an article in wikipedia logic dictates the same for Luke Hobbs. Luke Hobbs' appearance in four movies, two of which are higher in Box office sales than Star Wars Episode III, grant him superior notability to the robot general. Notability, of course, being a major criteria for inclusion on wikipedia. Bahb the Illuminated (talk) 18:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is a missing comma in there. I typo, therefore I am. It should have read 'wikipedia, logic'. I'm not referring to some concept. I'm not referring to 'other stuff exists' specifically either. I was comparing a one-movie character to a four-movie character, and referencing the movies MUCH larger grosses in the box office as a clear sign of notability. As for independent notability, there are non-trivial references noted in the article. This wouldn't even be a AfD if it were another franchise, but Fast & Furious actually outperformed Star Wars, Star Trek, and Harry Potter. It's characters deserve the same level of inclusion as any of those franchises. Arguably more so, as the film franchise tops the heap of all film franchises. Even if I haven't paid to see one, ever, and did pay to see all of the other three franchise film series I mentioned. As there is no specific Notability guidelines for fictional characters that I have read, I will borrow some I know from other guidelines. 'Notability can be imparted.' 'This character was part of an ensemble cast that placed one or more films high in box-office ratings.'Bahb the Illuminated (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Either way there either is evidence of independent notability or there is not. You can find sources that prove that the character is indeed notable or you can't. The fact that a franchise is big means very little.★Trekker (talk) 20:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
After some digging (and finding out the following 1) way too many Fast & Furious fanfics have been written. 2)Dwayne Johnson lookalikes get recruited for gay porn 3) too many people want to buy clothes to make them look like Luke Hobbs) I submit the following links: http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0247678/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3665139/Dwayne-Johnson-flexes-mighty-muscles-Luke-Hobbs-shares-peek-Fast-8.html http://theactionelite.com/2014/01/luke-hobbs-worst-cop-ever/ http://www.criticalhit.net/entertainment/dwayne-johnson-reveals-first-look-at-fast-8s-hobbs-hints-strongly-at-spinoff-movie/ Some of which actually come from semi-reputable secondary sources. The character also seems to have been parodied in some popular music video by some musician I didn't read about.Bahb the Illuminated (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Agent_Luke_Hobbs&oldid=1137544333"