Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfred Jingle

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Jingle

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

Non-notable Dickens character; mergeback into appropriate list Orange Mike | Talk 03:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Redirect to The Pickwick Papers; I don't see enough notability for a stand-alone article. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC) Keep; per DGG, I'm convinced. Though I'd be happier if Samuel Pickwick, as the titular character, wasn't a redirect. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Jingle, along with Sam Weller (fictional character) and Mr Pickwick himself is one of the most notable characters in the Pickwick Papers. His distinctive speech habits and mannerisms have made him an archetypal and memorable figure in British culture outside the frame of the story. Also the information given in the article is not duplicated in the Pickwick Papers article and would unbalance it if it was translated there. Also the information on Mr Jingle in the article is referenced to a notable Dickens scholar. Also Mr Jingle is given a seperate entry in many encyclopedias, therefore the subject is encyclopediac and not trivial. See e.g. entry on Mr Jingle in The Reader's Encyclopedia, a standard work on world literature, edited by William Rose Benet.Colin4C (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge with The Pickwick Papers. It fails WP:N for a stand-alone article, but part of the article could be incorporated in The Pickwick Papers.--MaxEspinho (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is sourced to an independant reliable source (a Dickens scholar) according to the wikipedia guidelines. The source says that Jingle is an important character in terms of the Pickwick Papers and in his own right in British culture as appearing in theatrical productions etc. And as I have mentioned above, stand-alone articles about Mr Jingle have appeared in other encyclopedias, therefore the subject and article, as encyclopediac, is worthy of appearing in the wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia. The Readers Encyclopedia, which I mention above covers world literature from 2000 BC to 1960, from all continents - North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Australia and Africa - and still includes an article on Mr Jingle. According to such reliable outside sources, the character is notable in his own right. He is one of the three main characters in the Pickwick Papers, which is a very famous book, certainly in England, where there is a lot of Pickwick memorabilia. If you google "Mr Jingle" you will see that he is mentioned over and over again in lots of books as a kind of archetypal character. He has escaped from the frame of the original novel and is important in his own right. The Dickensian scholar Mark Wormald says "Alfred Jingle and Samuel Weller, had in the course of a few months achieved a celebrity we now tend to associate with the cinema; they had become components of a popular culture which they were already significantly changing...in one early stage adaptation Jingle was the main character..." etc etc Colin4C (talk) 08:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Click on the Google book search and Google scholar search at the top of the AFD, and there is notable mention of this character. Dream Focus 01:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:LETSNOTOPENOURSELVESTOPUBLICRIDICULE. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are many background characters in dickens that are mentioned once or twice, and have no role in the action. But this is a a character who does have significant role; the story could not be explained properly without him. There is an intermediate zone between protagonist and background, where the characters will be notable for very important books and major authors, but not otherwise. This is one of them/ . DGG ( talk ) 05:52, 24 February 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.