Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Evans, Sr.

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) buff bills 7701 03:02, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James Evans, Sr.[edit]

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

This does not establish notability independent of Good Times through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of plot details better suited to Wikia. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 18:45, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. John Amos was fairly outspoken about his views on the show's writing. As a result, his character was eventually killed off, and he was fired. I don't know whether that adds up to "real world significance", but here's some old newspapers that explain it: [1] [2]. In particular, this one talks about the characterization of Evans and how they creatively disagreed over the writing for this character (and J.J.). I dunno. Maybe it's enough to keep. If not, that's fine. Just redirect to Good Times. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to be covered under the Cast conflicts in the main article, so it would probably depend if there is enough info to get more than a paragraph out of it. TTN (talk) 19:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't know if the whole thing is enough to have a full-blown article on the character, but we at least have something to discuss beyond plot recaps. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 02:20, 24 November 2013 (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.