Jazz (Transformers): It's Blaze Fielding all over again.  Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 04:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Comics and animation ,  and Toys .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep: setting aside outright fan sites there is some spammy stuff on notable sites at least: - https://www.cbr.com/transformers-rise-of-the-beasts-mirage-stole-look-from-jazz/ - https://bleedingcool.com/games/transformers-jazz-autobot-statue/ - https://screenrant.com/why-jazz-died-in-transformers-movie/ BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 17:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Vote updated to Keep.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 16:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] weak keep is no better than redirect to list of transformers characters with jazz in it.  Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 17:48, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Bleedingcool is just a fan piece about some fan sculptue.  The other sources are borderline.  I'd like to see someone use the to at least try to stub a reception section.  Perhaos this fictional character is notable - perhaps, note, I don't say they are - but the current article is terrible.  AFDNOTCLEANUP, yes, but WP:TNT is an option too.  My vote is for weak redirect to the list of transformers, because the current article is a terrible piece of WP:FANCRUFT that has next to zero encyclopedic content.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 06:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We all know who the culprit is.  Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 14:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Culprit?  Creating an article in good faith (wich many seem to agree passes GNG) does not make on fit for a call out.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 06:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the above.  GNG is met, AfD is not for cleanup, which can be accomplished without redirection, merging, or deletion.  Jclemens ( talk ) 19:19, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  AfD is not cleanup.  Please note that most of these older transformers articles cover multiple related toys and characters in a multi-decade multimedia franchise with various pieces of art focusing on each individual character.  Most or all of them will meet GNG on their own.  But due to their nature, cleaning up the transformers articles will take some time and effort from some dedicated editors willing to research, verify, cite, copyedit, and indeed seek consensus on where information should exist.  WP:TNT is not going to help the situation until such an effort is underway.   — siro χ o 04:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per nomination.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.183.250 ( talk ) 02:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting, while true, "AfD is not for cleanup" is not an argument for this subject's notablity (beyond pop culture).  But not a strong deletion statement is given either so I'm relisting this discusion.  If you could highlight, out of all of this overly long article, sources that do establish GNG, that would make this closure more straight-forward.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment in response to relisting comment.  I'm honestly not surprised these articles aren't better referenced.  It's not fun wading through everything given the number of iterations and the amount of advertising for each of them.  I have zero doubt this and other similar original transformers characters all meet GNG individually, they just occupy a very different place in the cultural zeitgeist that is neither pure cruft nor academic.  Here's a bit of a refdump to get started with.  The Bellemo guide has sigcov of most of the original toys, including this one [18] .  Here's a different bleedingcool piece on a different incarnation of the toy.  [19] , Here's a comicbook.com article on yet another iteration of toys [20] .  Here's some more brief coverage from comicbook.com [21] that gives an interesting reception of the original character Jazz was one of the coolest characters in the G1 Transformers cartoon in the '80s - an early harbinger of the hip-hop culture to come, who had his own distinct swagger and then contrasts with the later movie character.  Here's some coverage of the character as a car from a car website [22] .  For this character in particular, there even seems to be some coverage in Jazz Times [23] though Google books snippet view is failing me and the microfiche on archive.org is not working for me.  — siro χ o 10:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yep, as it's been archived with the Cliffjumper discussion (another frustrating aspect of this sort of bulk nomination is how fractured the discussion gets) but as a general note Transformers looks like a highly tricky subject to write a good article on.  I've been down the rabbit hole a bit with the Transformers Wiki (which is a bit fanboy and a bit sneery) and while they're obviously beholden to a different set of standards in terms of sourcing it's actually maintained and researched pretty well.  But I digress.  As far as I can tell, Jazz is: - A character in the cartoon and the old film A similar but different character in Marvel comics A similar but different character in the new films A similar but different character in a newer cartoon on Cartoon Network A similar but different character in newer comics by IDW At various points a similar but different character in lots of less prominent media And a frequent source of merchandise, some of which is directly related to the various fictional characters and sometimes not ...and all of this seems to feed on each other as and when, so you get a toy of the movie character that looks like the cartoon character, or a new toy is referenced in a comic, or a piece of media adds additional character traits, et cetera.  Basically it's really easy to see how a page on any character can get messy very quickly without some sort of semi-official template being set out.  And it's easy to see why redirecting to a single bulk list is a dumb "wash our hands of this" step like so much of what happens in AfDs.  What would Jazz's entry on that list entail?  About the only thing universal is he's an Autobot who turns into a sportscar (as far as I can tell).  I'd be up for redirect or merge the second someone who was actually going to do the work puts forward a solution as to how to implement it.  In the meantime I reiterate Keep, as I feel sources are out there, they're just not immediately evident on Google, and those there suggest the character is worth a redirect minimum.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 13:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No evidence this character passes GNG, with content farms being shown as the only major mentions.  There has been no improvement since the article was kept 13 years ago and it's likely it will continue to be a fancrufty mess forever.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 12:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep One of the best known Transformer characters, SIGCOV exists such as the Screenrant source mentioned above.  Pawnkingthree ( talk ) 20:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And he makes the 100 Greatest Cartoon Characters In Television History .  Pawnkingthree ( talk ) 21:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hmmm.  That book seems like fancruft.  But it is technically reliable.  Sigh.  Seriously, you can publish a book about "100 fictional characters I like" in a reliable publishing house...?  Apparently, yes, you can.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fancruft, and no, a Screenrant article does not suffice to guarantee notability per GNG.  God gave us Wikia for a reason.  Drmies ( talk ) 20:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Drmies Right.  But take a look at my comment above.  I don't know what to make of that source, seriously...  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Piotrus , you mean that book?  That's pretty awful--I leafed through it, and it's no more than a coffee table book.  Screenrant as a publication is also fishy: the About Us and other pages just scream fancruft and commercialism.  Drmies ( talk ) 16:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd call the book mention arguably SIGCOV.  I don't think just one book mention is enough to save the character though.  If there were numerous sources similar to it, maybe.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 06:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as yes he is one of the best known Transformer characters, which I say warrants a keep.  Davidgoodheart ( talk ) 21:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Being a popular or a well known character doesn't mean the character is automatically notable.  Valnet sources lile ScreenRant doesn't help its notability.  Greenish Pickle!  ( 🔔 ) 04:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per above keep rationales.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 07:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per all the arguments above.  BOZ ( talk ) 15:43, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep obviously satisfies GNG.  InfiniteNexus ( talk ) 00:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   Come on.   It's "pop culture", sure, but sheesh, meets GNG, one of the most famous Transformers.   AFD is not cleanup, and even if the article was "cleaned up", an article about a kid's TV show character is just naturally going to attract weak accusations of fancruft, but which are really WP:IDONTLIKEIT arguments.  SnowFire ( talk ) 18:10, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as notable, but completely support cutting down the in-universe content.  Articles are supposed to be based on secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, primary sources.  Articles should not be summary-only descriptions of works; summaries of these works need to be concise in comparison to being treated in an encyclopedic manner.  Erik ( talk | contrib ) ( ping me ) 19:42, 31 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep