Gomer Pyle: If the character is not notable, I suggest a redirect and/or merge to List of The Andy Griffith Show characters Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. .  Spinixster (chat!) 07:21, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Television .  Spinixster (chat!) 07:21, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. characters#Private First Class Gomer Pyle .  This character does not seem to have enough SIGCOV.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 13:44, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Keep "Gomer" or "Gomer Pyle" has become a slang term for "fool" in English.  That suggests significance to me. I will see if I can find SIGCOV not already present in the article.  Wow, that's a lot...  Gomer Pyle and the Music of Southern Poverty Rural Comedy, Public Persona, and the Wavering Line Between Fiction and Reality [9] Gomer Questions Not all of these are suitable for use in the article, but they're there.  Stumble, bumble, mumble: TV's image of the South When I use a word . . . Medical slang: gomers and gomerettes Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 20:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That seems like notability only on one thing for me and can be easily merged into the show's legacy section.  As for the sources...  First and third sources are blogs and are thus unreliable.  Southerncultures and Proquest source are just passing mentions on the show.  That leaves the medical slang source, which can be used for the legacy section, as I said, because that's not enough to prove the character's individual notability.  Spinixster (chat!) 12:29, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The fact that this character was the lead on its own television show causes me to question whether it's appropriate to merge it into a list of characters on another show, which seems to have run for five seasons.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 00:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would think to merge it to Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C instead because it seems like the character is more popularized by it rather than The Andy Griffith Show.  Spinixster (chat!) 02:15, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep Weak merge .  My BEFORE suggests he may be notable due to his cultural impact (per cited BMJ scholarly article and some other sources above).  Here's another good academic ref: “There Goes Old Gomer” Rural Comedy, Public Persona, and the Wavering Line Between Fiction and Reality .  And Stumble, bumble, mumble: TV's image of the South .  Granted, the first one is balancing on SIGCOV, and I couldn't (quickly) access the second one, but with what we have here already I am was leaning keep.  Ping me if anyone does a deeper dig in the sources and wants to dispute SIGCOV being met.  PS.  Changed from weak keep to abstain/leaning merge because I did not notice Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. .  I am not sure if the characer has stand-alone notability separate from the show, this would require more reading than I have time dedicate.  For those who want to vote keep and would like me to change my vote, please tell me which sources contain SIGCOV about the character, not the show?  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 06:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The two sources were already broken down by me above.  Spinixster (chat!) 07:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Did you look at the first one I link?  I don't see it mentioned?  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:30, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It's the second link Darkfrog gave.  Spinixster (chat!) 09:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - The problem with a merge is the target could be the character, the term, or the nickname in Full Metal Jacket .  [10] So I don't see an obvious consensus for a merge target, so it has to be at least kept.  The article could be trimmed and cleaned up, rather than being deleted.  Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The nickname in Full Metal Jacket seems to be based on the character.  But either way, if it isn't notable, it shouldn't be kept ( WP:N still applies here).  An option would be merging the page into Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. and then making a disambiguation page, or just redirecting it fully to Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. instead.  Spinixster (chat!) 10:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I'm looking at the discussion above, and it's like it's an exercise in how can we dismiss references one-by-one.  Which makes it look quite a bit like WP:IDONTLIKEIT .  The character appeared not only initially on the Andy Griffith Show, but then was deemed worthy enough to be spun off to their own show which ran for 5 years.  And also appeared in character on the very popular and renowned I Love Lucy and Carol Burnett shows.  And as noted above, the name has entered the lexicon of language.  See also: wikt:gomer#Etymology_3 .  - jc37 10:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Jc37 Just because the character is the main character or has appeared in many other shows does not mean that they are notable on their own.  Gomer Pyle the series may be notable, but not necessarily Gomer Pyle the character.  See WP:N and WP:PAGEDECIDE .  Spinixster (chat!) 11:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, it's an encyclopedia.  Even if something is popular, that does not mean it warrants a separate page.  This character page can be easily merged into the Gomer Pyle series page.  Spinixster (chat!) 11:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just because the series may be notable, does not mean the character is not notable.  You're just doing a circular fallacy.  And all of Wikipedia could be merged into a single page.  That does not mean that we should.  And yes, I'm very well aware of WP:N , etc. I'm watching you seemingly trying to dismiss things individually, rather than see the topic in the aggregate.  And others above have shown you sources for notability.  Our focus is our readers and what they might look for.  So yes, this really comes across as IDONTLIKEIT.  - jc37 11:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Jc37 Those sources talk more about the show of a similar name, I have dissected it above.  And again, unless the character has individual notability, then they are not notable for a separate page.  I have already said that Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  The whole article is 90% plot summaries and mentions of the character in popular culture.  If you think the character is notable, please put forth sources that talk in depth about the character, don’t just say that “He is notable” and leave it at that.  See WP:USEFUL .  Spinixster (chat!) 13:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And yes, you didn’t really say WP:USEFUL in the original comment, but WP:N also says that popularity does not equal to notability, so 🤷 Spinixster (chat!) 13:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] JSYK, I have felt free to post sources for discussion here that I wouldn't necessarily use in the article itself.  I am not upset that you pick them over one by one.  I see that a bit like you thinking out loud.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 00:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep or merge to Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. .  I'm seeing signs of coverage.  The threshold here is unclear, and there is a logical merge target if there is a consensus this shouldn't have a separate article.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 13:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep .  Golly, he is a character in two notable series, The Andy Griffith Show and Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. Clarityfiend ( talk ) 02:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Clarityfiend As I've said above, being a character in two notable series does not mean that the character is notable individually.  Spinixster (chat!) 09:14, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I believe being a regular on two well-known series does.  See, for example, Lou Grant or Frasier Crane .  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 09:25, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Clarityfiend That does not mean that the character is inherently notable.  At least with Frasier's page (because I think Lou Grant's may not be as notable) it has clear WP:SIGCOV , so they're definitely notable, but with Gomer, there's not much.  I have already said a lot, and I don't want to repeat myself, so please take a look above.  Spinixster (chat!) 09:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I concur with the analysis of both Jc37 and Clarityfiend .  I see no real question about notability , but I see it reasonable to consider navigation.  The nomination suggests a merge/redirect to an Andy Griffith characters list, which while not without a reasonable basis, seems very unfortunate when considering the character played an important (23 episodes) but relatively minor role on that show and later had a much more prominent role on the highly successful show titled with the characters name.  The list of Griffith show characters redirect is therefore IMO a total non-starter.  To redirect/merge to the Gomer Pyle show is not unreasonable, although it would seem to minimize the characters impact beyond the TV shows.  While I could support a redirect to the Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. , I think that the typical Wikipedia treatment of super-characters, as well as prominent businessmen, is to have articles both on the individual and their organization(s).  Therefore I'm going with Keep .  Jacona ( talk ) 11:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I forgot to do this, but I changed the original redirect target of the nom from list of The Andy Griffith Show characters to Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C..  I suggest all future voters take a look at what I've said above before voting.  There may be another option to disambiguate the page to either refer to the character or the series.  Spinixster (chat!) 11:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The subject meets WP:GNG with sources in the article including America on the Rerun and "When I use a word ... Medical slang: gomers and gomerettes".  Further solid sources have been presented here.  There are literally 80 years of sources to comb through, and a quick before shows that many of them provide sigcov as well.   Here's a couple for good measure [11] , [12] While in some cases, even the most notable character could be merged to the benefit of readers, that clearly would not benefit readers here.  Not only is this a character in two notable shows, but the character is arguably more notable than either show they appeared on for the breadth and depth of cultural impact.  — siro χ o 03:31, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Breakdown of the sources below: The first source has a chapter focusing on Gomer, Goober, and Howard that can be used.  I don't know how useful it really is because it seems to mostly be a summary of the character's plotlines, which usually doesn't prove notability.  The rest of the mentions seem to be passing.  The second source doesn't seem to mention the Andy Griffith show, let alone Gomer.  The America on the Rerun book seems to mention Gomer in passing; there is a dedicated chapter on the Andy Griffith Show, but it's mostly quotes from interviews and focuses more on the actor.  Spinixster (chat!) 04:28, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Please, say that again, and then share with the room that you understand what the concepts of coverage and notability mean.  It's tempting to be humorous about this, but I read your comments and you seem serious.  - jc37 05:30, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The notability of fictional elements is a hard subject, especially when you try to decide what is notable and what is not.  WP:FICT does exist, but it doesn't go in depth enough.  I myself have experience writing these pages, and I find that: Sources on plotlines and trivia don't always prove the notability of fictional elements.  Unless there are sources talking about a certain plot point from a real-world perspective, and that's on a case-by-case basis, I find it to be WP:CRUFT , even if there's a lot of coverage about it.  The character has to be notable in multiple aspects.  In this case, "Gomer" has become a slang for idiot, and its use is common within popular culture, but that's just one thing, so unless there's more, it fails WP:SUSTAINED .  Of course, this is just a flexible idea, and it may change in the future.  Spinixster (chat!) 07:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - The Full Metal Jacket character (not to mention other characters, common insults/slang, etc.) is named after him because it's (or maybe it was) a ubiquitous cultural touchstone.  One of the most famous characters on US television (I would be surprised if there were anyone in the US over ~45 that hadn't heard of Gomer Pyle).  In addition to sources already found, we'd need to dig through pre-digital sources (unfortunately my newspapers.com subscription doesn't seem to be working at the moment).  — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:23, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Rhododendrites , you can access Newspapers.com via WP:TWL if you have access to it.  I wish you luck in finding information, but do try to find sources that talk about the character in a real-world perspective.  Spinixster (chat!) 13:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You know,  I think that last phrase was a bit much.  We're all Wikipedians here , and how long we've been editors shouldn't matter much, but still when I look at your contribs and you've been around for all of 3 years, and Rhododendrites for 16 years.  We all are expressing our opinions here, based upon sources.  And you seem to have a rather different interpretation of policy than I've seen.  But whatever, that last comment was a bit much.  I was surprised above by your comments, but seriously, wow at this last one.  You couldn't me rolling my eyes.  But I was... - jc37 14:52, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This makes me think I didn't understand Spinixster's comment, which I interpreted to be an odd application of SIGCOV or something.  And yes, it's when I try to access the account I have on newspapers via TWL is when it doesn't work.  — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:58, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I was just giving out a tip.  I didn't mean it in a harsh way and English is not my first language so sorry if that was what you read it as.  Spinixster (chat!) 14:58, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Fair enough.  For future reference, it was the "...but do try..." that lent rather emphasis to the phrase, telling a long term Wikipedian something rather obvious, that made your words sound rather bad, to say the least.  - jc37 18:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Incidentally, Wikipedia:Systemic bias , and WP:RECENTISM , might be worth reading, along with Wikipedia:Verifiability#What_counts_as_a_reliable_source .  - jc37 18:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Gomer is too recognizable and well known for his page to get deleted.  It’s like deleting the page for Peter Griffin .  Scratchu90 ( talk ) 18:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Do you have anything else to say other than WP:JN ?  Per that page, it's not useful just to say he's notable without explaining why and/or giving sources that prove notability.  Spinixster (chat!) 02:57, 27 September 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