Talk:Barry Hunau

Notability
It is currently not clear whether these individual meets the notability criteria described in Notability (people). That guideline suggestions that "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". The current article doesn't demonstrate that this is the case and a quick Google search didn't turn up a great deal. Adambro (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, sure Barry has never won a second place in the Holocaust denial cartoon competition in Iran, as User:Adambro favorite cartoonist did . I am afraid Barry's cartoons were not even represented at this racist antisemitic competition that User:Adambro likes so much . That's why Barry might be not so "notable" in user Adambro opinion. Is that it? --Mbz1 (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And btw here's the category for comic creator stubs. Almost none of them have links, sources and so on. As long as User:Adambro is happy with all of them and not happy only with this one, I would consider User:Adambro exercising double standards, as the user have done so many times in the past.And now may I please ask User:Adambro either remove the template he added to the article or to add the same template to few hundreds other Wikipedia stubs with the same issues? Mbz1 (talk) 15:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have a "favourite cartoonist". I can however be perfectly honest about how this article came to my attention. If I recall correctly, I noticed Mbz1 had created the related category on Commons and saw a link to this article from the images in that category. I therefore looked at this article to try to learn more about the cartoonist to enable me to consider whether the images are within the scope of Commons. I'm afraid I don't have the time to look through all the other pages in Category:Comics creator stubs and I hope Mbz1 would reconsider what seems to be his suggestion that I can't highlight potential problems with this article if I don't do the same with other articles in that category. He cannot seriously demand that I tag hundreds of other articles as lacking references before I am allowed to tag this article. I cannot comply with his request to remove the template because what it says remains accurate.


 * I would ask that Mbz1 focuses his efforts on trying to demonstrate that this individual meets the Notability (people) criteria rather than simply commenting on me. Adambro (talk) 15:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * So what is your conclussion so far? Are the cartoons within the scope of Commons or you're going to try them deleted, if I may ask please?--Mbz1 (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that very much depends on whether they are considered to be by a notable cartoonist. If not then they may not have any real educational value so fall beyond the scope of the project but that is really a discussion for Commons. As it stands, this cartoonist does not seem to meet the notability criteria set out in the relevant Wikipedia guideline, that they should have "received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Adambro (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Broken format
It appears this diff broke format and now we have in red Expression error: Unexpected < operator. Previous revision appears OK. Oops. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * px are not required at image size, infoboxes should definitely burn in hell
 * AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Image
Hello, the image deletion is being discussed though, let's not rush and act as if we know the future. I'm not an expert on copyright, but I feel that usage in this article of low resolution 4KB image is a fair one for informational use. Anyway I'm restoring the image in the infobox meanwhile, since the image definitely illustrates the subject. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 22:27, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I note you've changed the image now which does slightly alter the situation here. On the situation as before though with the photo, there is an established guideline (WP:NFC) that says it isn't acceptable to use unfree images of people who are still alive and it would therefore be possible, though not necessarily easily, for someone to create a freely licensed photo of that individual. There would have to be exceptional circumstances here for us to use that photo.
 * The cartoon image might be possible to use as it stands though as the permission filed in OTRS suggests he has released his cartoons on his website under a free licence. I'd have to look at this more closely to say with more confidence whether we could consider it to be available under a free licence. However, since Mbz1 was responsible for negotiating that permission in the first place, I wonder whether she might be best placed to approach Hunau and see whether he would agree to release a photo of himself under a free licence where he is properly entitled to do so. That would probably be more useful to our readers than a cartoon of him. Adambro (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. Thank you for clarification. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 23:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I did contact Mr. Hunau, and asked him to upload an image of him to Flickr, which he did. Unfortunately the license is not the right one to upload it to Commons yet. I hope he will change it soon. BTW Mr. Hunau informed me that one of his cartoons was selected for The best editorial cartoon for 2011 too, which means that yet another RS could be added to the article soon. I believe AfD should be withdrawn, and yes, the cartoon should be free in accordance with OTRS permission.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:23, 5 February 2011 (UTC)