Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Clark (Tom Clancy character)

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. Cunard seems to have been persuasive enough to convince others. v/r - T P 07:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

John Clark (Tom Clancy character)

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

A fictional character with little real-world notability, only in-universe notability and as such is not a suitable topic for a standalone article. Also no cited source WP:V verifies the WP:GNG notability of this fictional character. AadaamS (talk) 08:34, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seeing sources for wider notability; this should be transwikied to http://tomclancy.wikia.com/wiki/Tom_Clancy_Wiki --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Vipinhari || talk 09:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Transwikify - per Vipinhari. Insert CleverPhrase Here 10:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per WP:BKD in addition to Jack Ryan (character) as precedent. Has appeared in multiple books and films. While it's written from primarily a in-universe prespective, Deletion is not cleanup. I see that AadaamS has decided to pick on this and Domingo Chavez for deletion, two of the better written biographies in the Ryanverse as compared to Robby Jackson and Ed Kealty Hasteur (talk) 13:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The quality of writing in the article is not in dispute, it is the notability of its subject. AadaamS (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Like many Wikipedia articles with parenthesis in the title, the default search tools do not work well. Fixing them by hand yeilds this, which shows a lot of commentary about the multiple on-screen portrayals of this character. Unless the nominator is prepared to argue that no more than one of these mentions constitutes nontrivial, independent reliable secondary sourcing (and that's a pretty high bar), I think we can agree that the article as currently written is notable but could sure stand to make use of some of these sources. Jclemens (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I am prepared to argue that all of the TC characters should be merged to a single new article, List of Tom Clancy characters or List of Ryanverse characters. Those sources indicate notability for the actors, the TV shows but unless analysing the character is the main topic of the article, they don't count towards establishing the notability of the character itself. Notability of an actor such as Harrison Ford isn't inherited by the character he portrays. AadaamS (talk) 17:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - That merger would be a less unwelcome outcome, and pretty much moots the need for an AfD, but I disagree that the article is not sufficiently notable. Any time a reliable source talks about an actor playing a character, it contributes to both the notability of the actor AND that of the character portrayed. In general, the bar for notability for actors under the GNG is quite a bit lower, because an actor will play multiple roles per year, while a fictional character is unusual if there are more than two separate portrayals which receive media attention. Thus, I continue to believe that the fictional character John Clark is notable, as are the actors who have portrayed it. Jclemens (talk) 02:07, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Where does the GNG say that actors have a lower bar for GNG notability? Please post a link to the relevant section.AadaamS (talk) 10:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - Nowhere. I should have said notability (2-3 independent, non-trivial RS) is easier to achieve for actors than characters because actors portray many characters while a character often is portrayed only once. Does that help? Jclemens (talk) 05:19, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        My interpretation of WP:TRIVIALMENTION is that articles which name the actor to portray a role doesn't count towards establishing GNG because the main subject of such an article is the casting of a film, not the character itself. An article which has a character as the main subject would discuss the actions, evolution, impact or history of the character. AadaamS (talk) 16:51, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No third-party reliable sources cited to indicate notability. Extensive in-universe content requires deletion, see WP:WAF. Sandstein 08:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. As mentioned in Domingo Chavez, BKD, referenced above, explicitly says, While a book may be notable, it is not normally advisable to have a separate article on a character or thing from the book—if anything that should be a rationale for merge. But without a single reliable, secondary source in this article asserting the character's notability, there is nothing but plot detail to merge. I'm amenable to a merge target, if a good one exists, but there is no policy-backed rationale for keeping this article separate in any form. I'd be opposed to a separate character list as well unless there are sources that discuss the characters as a separate and distinct concept from the book. Otherwise they should be summarized and covered adequately within a character section of the main article. czar 17:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Ryanverse now that a suitable series article exists. The character's WP coverage should be proportional to its RS coverage and can spin out summary style. While Clark would be the most likely candidate to spin out, I don't see enough coverage in his own context to justify a dedicated article. If Cunard's sources warrant a full Development and Reception sections for the character (and right now, I'm skeptical) after that expansion, I'd have no opposition to Clark's own article. czar 11:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.
1. Kelly, Ed (1998-08-16). "Tom Clancy's Next Hero". The Buffalo News. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Millions of fans of Tom Clancy's thrillers will cheer publication of his "Rainbow Six" because it offers a second principal character to share marquee status with his longtime hero Jack Ryan.
  The new principal arrival is John Clark, only a supporting character in earlier Ryan stories, "The Cardinal of the Kremlin," "Clear and Present Danger" and "Without Remorse." But Clark, described as Jack Ryan's "alter ego" and "Dark Side," gets top billing in "Rainbow Six."
  Clark, a product of the U.S. military establishment, is now director of a London-based international special operations strike force called the Rainbow Unit, dedicated to thwarting terrorism by whatever means necessary. Diplomacy may have worked well for Ryan, but Clark and his buddies provide "the hammer." They believe violence and deadly force are the deterrents for terrorism.
  This article provides a detailed biographical background about John Clark. It notes that he was "only a supporting character" in three previous Ryan books. It contrasts Clark with Tom Clancy's previous hero, Jack Ryan, by noting that Clancy called him Ryan's "alter ego" and "Dark Side". It further details the contrast by saying that whereas Ryan used diplomacy, Clark uses "the hammer" through "violent and deadly force" to "dete[r]" terrorists.
  The article does a further character contrast by noting that John Clark has "rougher edges" than Jack Ryan and that the "steely" Clark does not have Ryan's "full dimensions".
  The article calls Ryan "a new American hero for the cusp of the new geopolitical millennium" and "another unusual and timely creation: an American hero for the paranoid present".
  This is very substantial analysis of the character.
2. Bargreen, Melinda (1998-08-02). "An Action-Packed Summer Read -- Tom Clancy's Latest Storms The Shores". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  The main hero here is John Clark, the ex-Navy SEAL who went ballistic in an earlier Clancy novel, "Without Remorse," and whom Clancy has called "the dark side" of his primary hero, Jack Ryan.
  ...
  Clark is quite a fellow, too. He has more decorations than the White House Christmas tree: Navy Cross, Silver Star with a repeat cluster, Bronze Star with Combat-V and three repeats, three Purple Hearts, et al. He's the hero of many covert international missions in which the Free World's bacon was definitively saved.
  He may be pushing 60, but Clark can still run with the big dogs, and he still gets that dangerous look on his face that makes smart people not want to mess with him.
  This material provides significant coverage about John Clark's biography.
  The author further draws a parallel between the aging author Tom Clancy and the aging main character John Clark who is "pushing 60":
  About the only thing that has changed is that there are many more ruminations on how little fun it is to get old, especially for an action guy. Clark is well into middle age, like his creator, and "Rainbow Six" is peppered with mordant observations about looking at "the next major milestone on his personal road to death (with) the number sixty on it."
3. Cross, Howard (1998-09-13). "Rich Characters Mark Clancy Techno-Thriller". Chattanooga Times Free Press. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Fans of Tom Clancy were first introduced to the heroic character of John Clark in Cardinal of the Kremlin, a novel of international intrigue that primarily revolved around Clancy's favorite character, Jack Ryan. In Cardinal, Clark had a small role, certainly nothing auspicious enough to suggest that he would become Clancy's second-favorite fictional character. Clark again appeared in tandem with Jack Ryan in the succeeding novels Clear and Present Danger and The Sum of All Fears. In each case, Clark's role was larger, practically on a level with Ryan himself, with Clark specializing in intelligence and covert operations. Then Clancy wrote a novel unlike any other he had penned before -- Without Remorse -- set in Baltimore in 1969, dealing with a man named John Kelley, a man who fights his own private drug war, who ultimately takes on the name John Clark and begins a new life in the intelligence field. This novel, which dealt with the issue of vigilante justice, was solely about Clark and his background.
  This article discusses heroic character John Clark's growing role in author Tom Clancy's successive books.
4. Levins, Harry (1993-08-01). "Clancy Looks Back in a Familiar Style". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Clancy's regular readers may recall Clark as the grimly efficient CIA agent who has aided Ryan in three earlier novels. "Without Remorse" tells us who John Clark really is.
  He's a cliche, actually. As the book opens, Clark lives as a recluse, a former Navy commando who saw too much combat and wants only to get away from the world. As is the case in any number of thrillers that star reclusive trained killers, the world refuses to go away.
  In this book, the world presents Clark with two sets of problems: a heroin ring in Baltimore that murders his newfound lady friend, and a secret POW camp in North Vietnam. Clark responds by turning into two more cliches: Charles Bronson in those vigilante movies, and Sylvester Stallone in those Rambo movies.
  The article provides analysis of Tom Clancy character John Clark by saying that he is a "recluse" who has seen "too much combat and wants only to get away from the world". The article provides further analysis by comparing John Clark to Charles Bronson in "vigilante movies" and Sylvester Stallone in "Rambo movies".
5. Johnson, Alan (1998-08-03). "Cold War's Over, But Clancy Finds Evil Hiding Behind Trees". The Columbus Dispatch. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Clancy reprises one of his favorite heroes, ex-Navy SEAL and CIA operative John Clark, master of macho military machinations. Clancy previously dispatched Clark to battle drug lords in Colombia,warlords in Japan and nuclear terrorists in the United States.
  In this book, an aging but still active Clark is assigned to head Rainbow, an international counter-terrorism task force based in Hereford, England. Clark, designated "Rainbow Six," has mixed feelings about the assignment, not because he doesn't find the challenge of combating terrorism compelling, but because as an action figure with 30 years in the field, he regards his duties as largely administrative he's a desk jockey doing paperwork "any self-respecting accountant would have rejected."
  The article notes that John Clark is one of author Tom Clancy's "favorite heroes" and provides significant biographical background about the subject.
6. Signor, Randy Michael (1998-08-02). "A thrill ride of a read - Clancy's latest keeps empire alive". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  There's much that is attractive about Clancy's books. Unlike the characters in most comic books, for instance, Clancy's heroes age in real time. Jack Ryan has, over the years, gone from naval officer to CIA spook to president; in this book, he is so far out of the story that his name is never uttered_he is just referred to as "the President." John Clark, who has starred in several other Clancy novels, often with Ryan, is here easing into the shadows as well, and his young protege Domingo Chavez is clearly being groomed to star on his own in future novels. I think that's kinda cool. It adds to the sense of verisimilitude that Clancy depends upon to captivate his readers.
  The article discusses how in Rainbow Six, John Clark is being "eas[ed] into the shadows" as a young protege is "being groomed".
7. James, W.R. (1993-08-01). "Clancy Gives Jack Ryan a Vacation". The San Diego Union-Tribune. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2016-04-04.
  The article notes:
  
  Jim Kelly, a k a John Clark, is home from the war, trying the best he can to forget the nightmare called Vietnam. He's making good money as a demolition expert for an oil company and his wife, Tish, is three months pregnant. Things are pretty good -- until a runaway truck ends her life and his hope. "There was nothing else to be done for a man who would have accepted hell rather than this, because he'd seen hell. But there was more than one hell, and he hadn't seen them all quite yet."
  The article provides substantial biographical background about John Clark's earlier life.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow John Clark to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 04:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Secondary information notes: "Examples of useful information typically provided by secondary sources about the original work, or primary and secondary sources about information external to the work:".
One example is "the development, both before its first appearance and over the course of the narrative". Sources 1 and 3 in particular describe John Clark's increasing prominence as a character over Tom Clancy's successive novels.
Another example is "critical analysis of the work of fiction, including discussion of themes, style, motifs and genre". Source 1 in particular provides critical analysis of John Clark.
Cunard (talk) 04:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Notability notes:
All fictional topics must meet the notability guidelines to warrant articles specifically about them. As mentioned earlier, the rule of thumb is that if the topic is sufficiently notable, secondary sources will be available and will ideally be included on article creation.
The sources I've provided here show that the subject passes the notability guideline.
Cunard (talk) 04:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked through the first several and they're book reviews: they describe the book's main character in the context of the book. Other characters are mentioned in this fashion too—if anything, based on these sources, this character would deserve a section on a page of recurring Clancy characters. czar 05:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was a page called Ryanverse, but it was redirected to Jack Ryan (character) in January 2010. Here is a link to the last version before the redirect. I would support selective merging/redirecting Domingo Chavez (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domingo Chavez), Robby Jackson (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robby Jackson), and Ed Kealty (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Kealty) to a page like Ryanverse. But regarding the John Clark page, there probably is enough material for a standalone page although a merge to a characters page is also possible.

Cunard (talk) 06:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored Ryanverse and added three sources. Pinging AadaamS (talk · contribs), Piotrus (talk · contribs), Insertcleverphrasehere (talk · contribs), Hasteur (talk · contribs), Jclemens (talk · contribs), Sandstein (talk · contribs), and Czar (talk · contribs).

I believe that John Clark (Tom Clancy character) has enough coverage in reliable sources for a standalone article. I've done cursory searches on Domingo Chavez (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domingo Chavez), Robby Jackson (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robby Jackson), and Ed Kealty (at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Kealty) and haven't found the same depth of coverage as John Clark, so I've supported merge/redirecting them for now to Ryanverse without prejudice against spinning them out again if significant coverage in sources surface.

Cunard (talk) 06:33, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of the sources you listed, I think #1 an #7 truly counts towards establishing GNG of the character, the others are book reviews where the main character is described but not really discussed in depth. So I think this character is better off as a section in the Ryanverse article. As far as I can see, this character still has mostly in-universe notability, see WP:NFICT: Articles on fiction elements are expected to cover more about "real-world" aspects of the element, such as its development and reception, than "in-universe" details. So I think this should be merged to Ryanverse and this article redirected there. AadaamS (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The sources listed are mostly book reviews and that is an indicator that this character lacks notability which is independent of Ryanverse or the books in which this character appears. AadaamS (talk) 07:30, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cunard makes a compelling argument that this character is notable enough for a standalone article. clpo13_(talk) 06:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been successfully pinged. The sources found by Cunard should compel every last good faith contributor to acknowledge the notability of the character. If any do not revisit the discussion, that should be taken as evidence that they've declined to continue participation and their pre-Cunard !votes be struck as rendered irrelevant. Jclemens (talk) 07:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cunard's argument shows that this character is notable enough to have it's own article, and has received significant independent coverage — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 23:14, 8 April 2016 (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.