Talk:Jon Snow (character)

Jon Snow (character) has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 24, 2016	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 13, 2016.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that actor Kit Harington publicly apologized for "lying to everyone" about the onscreen fate of his Game of Thrones character Jon Snow?

A Song of Ice and Fire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject A Song of Ice and Fire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of A Song of Ice and Fire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.A Song of Ice and FireWikipedia:WikiProject A Song of Ice and FireTemplate:WikiProject A Song of Ice and FireA Song of Ice and Fire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Novels: Fantasy Mid‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

RM, Jon Snow (character) → Jon Snow, Jon Snow → Jon Snow (journalist), Partial move [Jon Snow → Jon Snow (journalist)], 2 March 2016, Discussion
RM, Jon Snow (character) → Jon Snow, No consensus, 2 December 2018, Discussion

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Extended relatives in the infobox

There has basically been an edit war going on for days over the inclusion of extended relatives in the infobox of this article. While other editors (including myself) have provided reasoning in their edit summaries and/or asked for discussion, the IP who keeps reverting the material seems to have no interest in that. And though he/she uses a different IP each time, it is clearly the same person. I've had the page protected again to hopefully encourage discussion here to gain some consensus on this (stupid) issue. I currently have no opinion myself whether the info should stay or go. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 16:35, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some names on whether they are actually relevant to understanding the plot, and therefore the character. For instance, while Rickard Stark is Jon Snow's grandfather, this is never significant to the plot in the TV series (as far as I know the books as well), and nor is Rickard Stark a significant character. There has to come a point to when you stop listing characters like this, so if listing a relative helps with understanding the plot, put it in IMO, but putting a character in for the sake of putting a character in is not helpful. As the purpose of this article should be to summarize outside reception/analysis of the character, not to talk about plot developments (although that is necessary in order to understand the reception/analysis), only relatives that are crucial to understanding the plot, and therefore the other sections, should be included. --Ted Edwards 19:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's back on with infobox bloat. Maybe art. should be protected? Mithoron (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've also considered maybe it's time to protect the page again due to the infobox edits again. Anatashala (talk) 18:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging IP editor(s) @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:155b:d4b9:9398:21cf:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:24:3c27:9aa3:991b:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:407:6563:8f5b:5823:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:507b:396d:b43:dd39:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:3dd9:857f:1e7d:da47:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:1cdd:461:df18:cae:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:ec49:6257:edfd:2728:, @2a00:23c6:9f0a:601:558b:50cf:1364:6a7a: (likely all the same editor). Multiple editors have objected to your addition of trivial character relatives and descriptions to this already huge infobox recently. There have been several justifications in edit summaries for reverting your edits, but you have never explained in edit summaries or on this talk page why you believe these additions should remain in the article. Please comment here and make an argument for your edits. Our next step is to protect the article so that you will not be able to edit it until you become a registered user. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 17:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TAnthony: Uh... you do realize that pinging IPs doesn't work right? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah, but we had to at least try so we can better justify protection.— TAnthony^Talk 17:48, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There has been another undiscussed edit, I'll seek protection.— TAnthony^Talk 19:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "storyline"

@Nedhartley: Hey, I just reverted you again with an edit summary, but I realize should have commented here first, sorry. I'm not trying to edit war over this LOL. It seems to me that "storyline" is the accepted usage here but I'm willing to discuss. Other editors are obviously welcome to join in. Thanks!— TAnthony^Talk 16:44, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just following Webster's Collegiate. I, too, will not engage in an edit war; it's not that important. Have a nice day. Nedhartley (talk) 17:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]