Was the "inquisitive office-boy" such a prevalent trope at this time (or even a genuine position) that any series without one popping up in a newspaper office would have felt somehow incomplete?  In other words, if you wanted to make The Daily Star seem believable, you'd have to occasionally establish that in addition to star reporters Clark Kent and Lois Lane, it also housed gossip columnists, sport writers, advice columnists, etc.  Would having a young, snooping, eager kid have been recognized by audiences as 1938 as something that would help complete that illusion?  It still seems odd to me that a ten year old kid would even be able to get into such a building never mind have a job even if it amounted to nothing more than carrying out menial tasks and for that reason, it would seem as if Siegel and Shuster had something, if not unique, than unusual.  In that case, it would seem that that blond haired kid in Action #6 wasn't intended to be a toss away character and in fact, there's actually a red-haired kid with a bow-tie in Action #10 who looks looks more like Jimmy than the kid in Action #6 or Superman #13.  

It's also been stated that Jimmy Olsen was created for the radio program and I guess you'd have to know where they got the idea for the character from.  Was he introduced independently of the comic or was this "inquisitive office-boy" offered to the show in a sort of "well, we've also got this kid we haven't done much with in the comics yet, you might want to use..." kind of way?  

Even if that kid in Action #6 wasn't meant to be of any importance, why does Siegel and Nowak's Jimmy look so much like Siegel and Shuster's kid?  Were they trying to retroactively establish that Jimmy predated the radio show for some reason or was Siegel genuinely trying to do something with this kid he had plans for but had brushed to the side?

There's also the fact that 'Jimmy' was an ubiquitous name at the time... there's not reason that that blond Jimmy could ahve been a different Jimmy than Jimmy Olsen, who hair and freckles are pretty defining characteristics later and not present.

Also a point of contention is in regards to if Archie Goodwin and Howard Chaykin created the character of Harvey Bullock for Detective Comics #441 (June, 1974):



and that Doug Moench and Don Newton later further developed the character for Batman #361 (July, 1983):



or if Doug Moench and Don Newton created a new character entirely.

It’s interesting, because on this page, Archie Goodwin wrote the 1974 Bullock as someone who seems confident in arrogantly dismissing Commissioner Gordon and standing up for himself, something which the 1983 Bullock seems to share:

Fairly sure they were different people. I remember them meeting once due to some time/dimension-travel shenanigans (one of the Zero Hour tie-ins maybe?)