Talk:List of Pulp Fiction characters

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 August 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Withdrawn.

Merge

Merge? So by your logic it's OK to have a separate article for every single character (as exists now), than have one page with all the characters? Merge, this is almost as long as the Pulp Fiction article itself, I only created it so we wouldn't have seperete pages for characters, Vincent Vega, Butch Coolidge, Mia Wallace and Jules Winnfield all had their own page before I created this.--The Dominator (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With all the sources available on these characters, this article is likely going to grow fast. Although I'm indifferent to how this content is formatted so long as a character name rediects to specific content about the character, this sub-article overall seems to me the most helpful way to deal with descriptions and cited crit of the characters (rather than the movie itself). Gwen Gale (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jules' car

What kind of car is that? Knowing Tarantino I glark it's from the 70s but I don't know much about cars. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that Jules mentions it, I have the film on my computer right now, give me two minutes.--The Dominator (talk) 20:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Wolf calls it "1974 Chevy Nova" Chevrolet Nova.--The Dominator (talk) 20:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oy, now I remember :) Thanks. I've got the film on my hard disk too but somehow I forgot Mr Wolf mentions it whilst talking to Monster Joe. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grace

Chopper which he calls Grace? I don't remember that.--The Dominator (talk) 22:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you do: He asks if Grace will ok, parked out front (it's Tuesday, not Thursday) and the name is painted on the gas tank. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BMW

BMWs I can recognize and I've always thought the red one outside the apartment building belongs to Brett, wish I could find a source to support my OR. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man #4

"shows disloyalty and cowardice towards his accomplices" seems self-evident to me but I've no worries if another editor deletes it as OR, these movie articles are fraught with opportunities to stray into OR and it's more helpful I think to stray on the side of unambiguous description, leaving any interpretation to cited sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alot of things are considered original research here, I'm not too uptight about it, but just for example saying that Raquel has a sense of humor is considered OR, so try to limit that. Other than that, great job on bringing this article up to shape. btw I think Man #4 was just really scared, not showing disloyalty.--The Dominator (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and I let some of it slide assuming sources will show up in support but deleting it's ok too, since as cited crit gets added, so will these traits (if they're indeed noted) and with no question of OR. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering

I suggest putting these sections in order of appearance in the film, comments? Gwen Gale (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought something more like, importance, this order: Vincent, Jules, Butch, Mia, Marcellus...--The Dominator (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mere redirect

Seeing that Pulp Fiction (film) has a fleshed-out Plot section and Cast section to cover anything relevant about the film's characters, and the page consensus is to not merge this article, can we not do a redirect to Pulp Fiction (film)#Cast? The way I see it, the list is only from characters of a single film. I don't mind character lists if the characters transcend a single fictional topic (to capture the overall arc of said character), but here, there's nothing that hasn't been already covered by the main film article, and the rest are details in watching the film itself. How about we just go ahead with the redirect? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree for multiple reasons.

There is tons of useful information here and the major characters are discussed in an out of universe style.
It does repeat the film article alot, but I'm planning on doing some research on the critical reception and production of the film, so I hope I'll be able to add much more.
A major reason is that before we made this page, separate pages existed for 5 of the characters. With this page, people are less tempted to create new pages for the characters. The Dominator (talk) 15:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that the merging was opposed because it was assumed that the content would be wholly copied and pasted. I understand the compression of the individual character articles to this list, but the list currently contains either in-universe information, trivia, or background information redundant to the film article. In addition, there are incredibly minor characters that do not warrant encyclopedic value. If you are going to find more information, why can't you add it to any of the bullet points under the Cast section at the film article? It really strikes me as inflated importance of the characters of this one film to have their own article. What more do you believe could be added? The existing casting/role information seems pretty sufficient with room for just a little more expansion, seemingly not enough to warrant an actual list. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This film is so notable that the characters themselves are highly encyclopedic, both cinematically and culturally, hence this article is not only helpful but IMHO it is needed. This said, any worries about duplication and forking should be dealt with as they happen. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you demonstrate how the film is so notable that it warrants such a separate list? It's certainly popular among a certain generation, but there are many other films that are highly touted by other generations before and after it. The notability of the characters are solely because of this film. Their notability does not transcend the film itself. When you refer to a character, you're referring to Pulp Fiction. You'll never be able to refer to the character beyond Pulp Fiction itself. Thus, the claim of notability is film-centric, so I see no reason why Pulp Fiction (film)#Cast cannot sustain all relevant information about each actor and role as their pop culture relevance. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Ebert and I have not always agreed with each other (like on Picnic (film), which he loathes and I like, rather a lot) but years back we had a very happy back and forth about our notions on Michelangelo Antonioni and Federico Fellini, so I'll cite him here.[1][2][3] I do understand what you're saying and I think it's reasonable, we don't agree on breaking the characters out into their own article is all and that's ok. Let's let consensus have its sway on how encyclopedic this article may be. Cheers. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We should let the article be for a while. Right now, I have different priorities on Wikipedia, but I think I can eventually get around to it, hopefully in the next few months. I say, let the article stay for a few more months, if it looks like crap after that, then redirect. This way though, I think people are less tempted to create separate articles for characters. The Dominator (talk) 01:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this article doesn't look too helpful now. For me, so long as the character names redirect to their descriptions, I'd be ok with however this is handled. I do think there is enough critical commentary available to build this into a thorough, separate article. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are enough sources. Books written about Tarantino, reviews etc. I think this article has a good chance and I can realistically see tis becoming a featured list. The Dominator (talk) 03:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gimp

Until i found his section, i intended to include this in Butch's section:

(a S&M-restrained, gagged, and masked prisoner or compatriot of Maynard and Zed)

I mention that here for the sake of

gagged (and unable to "scream") tho he tries to get their attention
the S&M link for, what i think is more clearly communicated by the scene than the "black leather" description does.
--Jerzy•t 09:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Pulp Fiction Mia.jpg

The image Image:Pulp Fiction Mia.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addition

I think the character "Esmarelda VillaLobos" (the Taxi driver) should be added to the list, since she has a speaking role.

I can live with that. Feel free to add her in- I'm crazy busy these days, otherwise I'd do it myself. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 04:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question for the experts

I was editing the page for Schandorf, Austria and saw this:

Schandorf is known as the childhood home of Vincent "V-Money" Vega.

Looks like vandalism to me (so I deleted it) but if by chance it's for real I'll put it back in. Please let me know.

Thanks, Opus33 (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely just made up vandalism/hoax. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 17:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Opus33 (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marcellus versus Marsellus

Two different spellings here. --71.247.247.152 (talk) 02:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do a Google search- most sources us "Marsellus" and I think that's what we should use as well. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 04:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited passages

It may be useful to contact DCGeist to see if he can recognize sources for any of the unsourced sentences in the list and perhaps merge them into the main article. Some items, like Sylvester Stallone considered to play Butch, seem very questionable. —Erik (talk • contrib) 19:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested name change....

Perhaps a name change to Pulp Fiction character studies...? as this artricle is much more than a simple "list". MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 00:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]