Why is this accepted, and upvoted Is James Bond explicitly described as caucasian in Ian Fleming's books?
And this question closed as off topic Is Miss Moneypenny describe caucasian in the novels? [closed]
Why is this accepted, and upvoted Is James Bond explicitly described as caucasian in Ian Fleming's books?
And this question closed as off topic Is Miss Moneypenny describe caucasian in the novels? [closed]
In short, because the first question relates to the main character of the Bond series, posed a potentially interesting question about casting decision. The Moneypenny question is derivative, a point that you explicitly make yourself in comments. Essentially, you could ask the same question about any character based on any book that has been adapted as a movie. I don't think it would be interesting or healthy for the M&TV site to do so.
As far as the Movie and TV community is concerned, we are not really that interested in a question about the description of the characters except in the context of the movies. At face value a question purely about Bond's physical description in the novels would be off-topic here, and as of now the question about Bond himseld is barely holding on (with 4 close votes). I think it survives because it poses the question about whether its suitable to cast someone with a significant physical difference from that described in the novel.
I believe the Bond question is still open because of the more general case that it addresses. It could certainly be asked better, and I would welcome people attempting to edit it in a way that improves it. The Moneypenny question while superficially similar is essentially either off-topic (because it is purely about a book), or duplicate (because its about race in casting decisions in Bond movies).