Talk:Julius No

Untitled

Correction on Trivia

"According to Philip Jose Farmer's Wold Newton site, No's mother was an unnamed agent of Fu Manchu." Actually, Win Scott Eckert owns the site, and No's mother does have a name. She's Madame de Medici, who appears in separate stories by Sax Rohmer which nevertheless have connections to the Fu Manchu novels. His father Julius was actually the blind mechanic Von Herder, who designed airguns for Professor Moriarty's gang in Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Adventure of the Empty House" (According to the article in question, Von Herder and Moriarty are half-brothers).

How was he defeated in the book? WP:SW 83.146.14.29 (talk) 05:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"No"?

Is this guy actually named after the English word "no", or is it just a coincidence? The Finnish translation of the book and film does refer to him as "Tohtori Ei", translating the name "No" as the word "no", but it could be a mistranslation. JIP | Talk 19:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

When Bond and Ryder were captured by No's troops..

I had presumed their washdown was for radiation contamination, not bacteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nighthawke75 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Very Nice Radiation Suits

Many Chinese People who wear very nice radiation suits (under henchmen in the film) Can this be removed? 2A02:C7D:C241:6D00:311D:6176:C1EA:916B (talk) 19:16, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Julius No. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722194838/http://www.007.info/Villains.asp to http://www.007.info/Villains.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:20, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Title of the article

The character of Dr. No is given no first name in the movie. The first name Julius is only used in the novel. Titling the article "Julius No" gives the inaccurate impression that the character was given a first name in the movie. It should be retitled "Doctor No" since that is the commonality between the novel and movie. SonOfThornhill (talk) 14:10, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Considering that Doctor No is correctly a redirect to the disambiguation page Dr. No, this would need to be something like Dr. No (Bond), unless you are asserting this is the primary topic (which would require a much stronger case). Or perhaps Dr. No (character) might work as it already redirects here. If you want to pursue renaming this, please review the instructions at WP:RM for establishing consensus for such any such move. FWIW, I don't think this is an actual problem and the current title is OK. older ≠ wiser 14:44, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

My issue is that titling the article (which deals with both the character from the novel and the one in the movie) as the name given in the novel only is misleading. An encyclopedia should strive for accuracy. The character in the movie is never given a first name. The only commonality is the title 'Doctor' and the last name 'No'. So it is more accurate to title the article 'Doctor No' and note that in the novel the character was given the first name Julius. SonOfThornhill (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I still don't see any issue. The film is derivative of the novel and it is really irrelevant whether the character's given name is known in the film. older ≠ wiser 14:59, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

The issue is that it is misleading. The character is never given a first name in the film. While the film is based on the novel it deveated in many ways from the novel throughout. There are events and characters in the film that were not in the novel, such as Felix Leiter. And there are events in the novel that don't happen in the film. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to be as accurate as possible. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:49, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

So what? That frequently happens with adaptations (although some, like several Bond films, take greater liberties with the source material). It is explained in the article and I find it hard to see as a cause of any significant confusion. older ≠ wiser 15:51, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Because the goal of an encyclopedia should be to be as accurate as possible, not 'close enough'. There are significant differences in appearance and backstory between the character of Dr. No in the novel and the movie. And just because you personally see a cause for confusion, that may not be true of others. Your earlier suggestion of Doctor No (character) is probably the best options. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:02, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

And I remain unconvinced that there is actually any inaccuracy at all, let alone significant enough to cause confusion. While I would have no concern with a title like Dr. No (character), I'd want to see broader consensus than just the two of us. older ≠ wiser 13:11, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

OK But that is your personal opinion. We should strive to be more objective as well as accurate as possible. The character of Dr. No is the movie is not given a first name. That is not an opinion, that is a fact. Thus, it is inaccurate to title the article using a first name used in another medium. But let's give it time and see what others have to say. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:32, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Claiming objectivity is a red herring. The film character is derivative of the novel's and any discrepancies should be addressed in the article. The title of the article is fine as is. older ≠ wiser 13:41, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Objectivity is never a red herring, especially for an encyclopedia SonOfThornhill (talk) 14:23, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

It is a red herring as your argument essentially boils down to Wikipedia:I just don't like it. The title of the article is not in any way objectively inaccurate. It perhaps is not the best possible title, but that is something determined by discussion and consensus, not some objective truth. older ≠ wiser 14:31, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

What discussion and consensus? There is no previous discussion about it on this page. And it is an objective fact that the character of Dr. No is never given a first name in the movie. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:08, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I was referring to discussion and consensus to change the title. Whatever changes the film made to the character is not very relevant for the title of this article. It is the name of the original character. Any changes through the various iterations should be described in the article. older ≠ wiser 13:28, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Do you have a link to that discussion? Would love to read it. Thanks. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:32, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I was trying to imply that YOU need to start such a discussion to establish consensus for changing the title (and again, the instructions are at WP:RM). older ≠ wiser 13:37, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

So this has never been discussed before. Which means there was never any consensus on what to title the article. OK SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:45, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

It has been at this title since November 2006 and you are the first to raise this as a concern. This is an implicit consensus. But yes, consensus can change, but that typically occurs through discussion once an article has been stable for so long. older ≠ wiser 13:52, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Also, if you want wider input, consider following the instructions at WP:RM. older ≠ wiser 13:46, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Was hoping to get more input first but OK. SonOfThornhill (talk) 14:24, 28 July 2026 (UTC)