- 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 redirect to The Firm (novel). Consensus is clear, and is supported by the absence of sources giving treatment of substantial depth to the fictional character. Since the previous edit history of the article will remain available under the redirect, any editor who wishes is free to salvage and merge previous article content to the respective articles on the book and the TV series. BD2412 T 03:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Abby McDeere (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Redirect to the novel. Fictional character with no significance outside of The Firm (novel) and its adaptations. Sources do not establish notability of the character. cagliost (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Any information to be retained can be moved here: The_Firm_(novel)#Characters. cagliost (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Query - some of the sources are certainly focused on the actors that portrayed the character, but several are focused on the characters and provide an in-universe assessment of the subject's relevance to a clearly notable book and movie and TV series. If you came away with the impression that "they refer to performances" then I have to query what steps you took to address steps A, B and C of WP:BEFORE ahead of nominating this article for deletion at step D? St★lwart111 15:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- My summary of the sources:
1. The book itself.
2. Does not establish character notability. (ChannelCanada)
3. Does not mention character.
4. Inflation.
5. Does not mention character.
6. Does not mention character.
7. Does not mention character.
8. Does not establish character notability. (Washington Post)
9. Does not establish character notability. (New York Times)
10. The book itself.
11. The book itself.
12. The book itself.
13. Does not establish character notability. (Variety)
14. Does not establish character notability. (Entertainment Weekly)
15. Does not establish character notability. (Ebert)
16. Does not establish character notability. (Hollywood Reporter)
17. Does not mention character.
cagliost (talk) 09:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Then Keep, as WP:BEFORE here is clearly woefully inadequate and the list above includes 7 references that - by the nominator's own admission - don't align with the nominator's premise (that they "refer to performances by the actresses"). Instead, they offer coverage of the character in the form of in-universe commentary about the character's place within a notable story. That's exactly the sort of coverage we expect to see for notable fictional characters, and in this case they appear in the New York Times, Washington Post and other consistently reliable sources. We should expect more than a vapid "does not establish character notability" without actual assessment of the value of each source. St★lwart111 10:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you explain how these sources establish this is a notable character?
- ChannelCanada says: "Entertainment One (eOne), Sony Pictures Television Networks, NBC and Global are proud to announce that Canadian actress Molly Parker (“Deadwood,” “Swingtown”) has signed on to star as Abby McDeere in the new legal drama series “The Firm,” based on John Grisham’s best-selling novel and executive-produced by Grisham and Lukas Reiter. Ten years ago, Abby helped her husband Mitch bring down a Memphis law firm that was a front for the Chicago mob. Her life was never the same. Abby’s a true partner to Mitch – a smart, resourceful woman who after a tumultuous decade is excited to start a new life in Washington, D.C. as a school teacher."
- Washington Post says: "Meanwhile, at the same office party, Mitch's wife, Abby (Jeanne Tripplehorn), is picking up Stepford Lawyers vibes. "The firm does not forbid wives to take jobs," one spouse tells her. "The firm encourages children." Soon Mitch is working too hard and too late, and an increasingly suspicious Abby is resenting him as she broods alone in their posh cocoon... Tripplehorn gives Abby a welcomely elegant and alert presence."
- NY Times says: "his blue-blood wife... the show puts Mitch McDeere (Josh Lucas) and his wife, Abby (Molly Parker), in Washington"
- Variety says: "Mitch’s teacher wife Abby (Jeanne Tripplehorn) smells a rat from the outset"
- Entertainment Weekly says: "But his wife, Abby (Jeanne Tripplehorn), who has worldlier intuitions than he does, is suspicious of the firm, and with good reason."
- Roger Ebert says: "Mitch moves to Memphis with his wife, Abby".
- Hollywood Reporter says: "So Mitch, wife Abby... until Mitch can get to a pay phone and tell Abby the code-red news... Abby is a dutiful wife but is worried that Mitch’s struggling solo firm doesn’t have enough paying clients to pay the mortgage."
- I don't see how any of these establish this character is any more notable than various other characters mentioned. These are passing references while reviewers describe the plot. It would be hard to describe the plot without mentioning Mitch's wife, but that doesn't mean she's a notable character. cagliost (talk) 11:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- There is coverage of the character here, I don't see how this merits a separate article. cagliost (talk) 11:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, that's exactly the sort of coverage we expect to see for fictional characters (those and the ones you missed). Again, WP:BEFORE. We're talking about a character that has been represented across multiple mediums. This is a silly and lazy nomination and you know it. St★lwart111 01:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- A non-notable character from a book does not automatically gain notability because it has been represented in additional mediums. That would apply to practically every character in the book. cagliost (talk) 08:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- You said "We should expect more than a vapid 'does not establish character notability" without actual assessment of the value of each source.'. I then quoted in full everything each source has to say about the character. Let me now provide an assessment of the value of each source. The ChannelCanada source is not a reliable source, it is a press release. The remaining sources are trivial mentions. cagliost (talk) 08:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- You say "they offer coverage of the character in the form of in-universe commentary about the character's place within a notable story. That's exactly the sort of coverage we expect to see for notable fictional characters". No, it is not. We don't need trivial in-universe description of the character's place within a notable story, we need sources establishing the character's significance independently of the story. Compare articles for secondary characters like Joker (character), Bulbasaur or Vladimir Harkonnen. cagliost (talk) 08:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I concur with cagliost. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to the novel. The current sources are a bunch of cherry picked trivial mentions that really don't have the weight necessary to even be placed in the article. TTN (talk) 16:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not the film or the television show, given that's what most of the available reliable sources cover? There isn't a good redirect target here. St★lwart111 01:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course the book is the correct redirect target, since that is where the character originated. cagliost (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2021 (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.