Talk:Samwell Tarly

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Samwell Tarly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307150640/http://grrm.livejournal.com/164794.html to http://grrm.livejournal.com/164794.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Notability

This topic is with out a doubt notable, user:Hijiri88 claims it's not. The page contains several sources that proves it has notability. -

Please demonstrate how the topic is notable. WP:GNG says If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. [emphasis mine]

Currently, this article contains nothing but in-universe plot-information and a few passing references to the actor's portrayal of the character. If you can't add information about real-world inspiration for the character, author's published commentary, themes, etc., then the character should not have a standalone article. Wikipedia does not include standalone articles on characters about whom all we can write is their in-universe character sheets.

The fact that reliable secondary sources have covered the character's in-universe information is irrelevant, because that still isn't enough to build an article out of.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

As you can see their are a lot of sources about the characters casting and all of that and more can even be added, also it has a lot of reliable sources in the article already. - AffeL (talk) 12:46, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

more can even be added Do that then. We'll see if the topic still looks like it doesn't meet GNG after you fix the article up a bit. I'll even do you a solid -- even though technically the maintenance should remain in the article until notability has been demonstrated, I'll agree to leave it out unless you try and fail to fix the notability problem. Currently, the article makes no claim to notability; both the books and the show include dozens of characters, and there's no reason to assume we can write anything about them beyond basic plot information Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:50, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Do that then Why are you using this tone with me, just relax. I still think it meets GNG as it is now, but don't worry more will be added. - AffeL (talk) 13:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

What tone? I told you to fix the article. I think it might meet GNG now too, since notability is about the topic, not the article as written at any given time. But the fact is that the article needs work to demonstrate that it meets GNG, since at present it includes nothing but plot and passing, barely noteworthy mentions. I think that if you could find reliable sources for things like that GRRM sees Sam as the character most like himself and that the character has been compared to similar "all-powerful shut-ins" in GRRM's other works such as the Great and Powerful Turtle (things I have gleaned from PJ videos, which as you said numerous times may not be considered "reliable sources" for Wikipedia factual claims), that would be great. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 20:52, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

By the way, this edit summary shows a grave misunderstanding of our notability guidelines. Did you even read my first response to you above? I took the emphasis off everything except "significant coverage" for a reason. If we have a lot of sources, but all those sources really say about this character is regurgitated plot summary, that is not enough to demonstrate notability.

As I said on Talk:Olenna Tyrell, I actually suspect this topic might meet GNG, but you have not done anything so far to demonstrate that, as all you have taken from the supposedly extensive sources is that the actor who played the character (and who is already covered in a separate article) was nominated as part of the cast for a few ensemble awards. Where is the literary analysis? Where are the themes, real-world influences, and critical reception?

I am actually fairly certain that reliable sources for such information on this character (though not some of the others) could be found, but are you interested in looking for them? You seem to have a fairly dismissive attitude toward the books and their place in popular culture in general, so I am wondering.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 00:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Awards are part of the reception, every major character article list the awards the actor has won or been nominated for the role. - AffeL (talk) 10:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@AffeL: Please name one "major character article", not written by you, that lists awards for which the actor was nominated as part of an ensemble. Palpatine is an FA (one of very few fictional character FAs, I believe), and I don't think it has ever listed awards for which McDiarmid was nominated even individually. Also, I'm not talking about that. The article needs to cite significant, relevant critical reaction to the character himself, not the actor's performance. Almost all of your work over the past two days on both this and the other character articles has focused exclusively on the actors, not the characters themselves, turning significant portions of the articles into WP:COATRACKs. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

You can look at GAs like Jon Snow and Tyrion Lannister(not written by me) among others, also the actors performance is part of the reception of the character, so it's not WP:COATRACK. As I said before, I am working on improving and expanding the articles. - AffeL (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

We have leeway to describe peripheral issues like the actor's award nominations for portrayal of the character as long as the article also addresses integral issues related specifically to the character and not the actor. Trying to demonstrate notability of a fictional character with acting award nominations, especially ensemble awards, is coatracking. Notability is not inherited: the fact that Olenna Tyrell and Khal Drogo appeared in the same TV show as Tyrion Lannister and Daenerys Targaryen does not grant independent notability to them, nor does the actors's having received award nominations. I am sure if you went back through all winners of the Academy Awards for "Best Performance by an Actor/Actress in a Leading Role", you would find that in fact very few of the characters they portrayed have standalone articles on Wikipedia. Let alone minor awards for which the actors were nominated as part of an ensemble. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:59, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

A character in a random movie is not the same as one in such a popular show/book. - AffeL (talk) 22:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Are you deliberately trolling? You are saying these characters inherit notability from their actors and television show because the actors have been nominated for fairly obscure ensemble awards, but if that argument held weight then the same would almost certainly be true for characters whose actors won the most prestigious acting award in motion pictures. How can you not see how this doesn't make sense? Are you still just trying to get under my skin because you think I "hate" Game of Thrones, as you were here? I get this impression every time you make some out-of-place comment about how awesome the show is, even though that is irrelevant to what we are talking about. If you could please try to focus on content, that would be great. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 22:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I never said that awards are the only thing for notability. And where is the "out-of-place comment about how awesome the show is"? , What I said was: "popular show/books", which is not an opinion, but a fact. - AffeL (talk) 22:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

As I have said elsewhere, this obviously isn't about the books: you are the one who made virtually all of these articles and you have a self-confessed dismissive attitude toward the books, and the existence of standalone articles on characters like Olenna Tyrell (again, why is this conversation not taking place over there?) whose relative importance is played up in the show, while much more important book characters who were cut from the show like Arianne Martell are relegated to lists, means this is exclusively a show problem. Anyway, being a character in a popular show does not mean one gets a standalone Wikipedia article. Mon Mothma is a character in frickin' Star Wars and she doesn't get an article. You are trying to demonstrate notability for Wikipedia purposes by listing the awards for which the actor was included in a list of the "ensemble" cast of the show, most of which they didn't even win. That is simply ridiculous. Award nominations might demonstrate the notability of the actors, but they have nothing to do with the encyclopedic value of standalone characters themselves. Yunshui already told you this on your talk page like two days ago, and yet you continue -- why? And why are you moving the discussion to this page? You really seem like you are trying to game the system by ignoring my pings on Talk:Olenna Tyrell and my suggestions that Talk:Khal Drogo might be a better venue for this discussion. I have already told you numerous times that I think Samwell Tarly probably does meet GNG (I placed the tag because the article made no claim to notability, which it should have), so trying to make me argue that he doesn't comes across very much like trolling. Stop it now. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Reliability of Esquire/Wiki What as sources

I opened a discussion about using Esquire/WikiWhat-facebook as sources for this article at RSN here -- Jytdog (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)