Talk:Sara Mayhew

Manga/Comics verbiage
I've noticed there's been some back and forth with at least one editor, 192.251.134.5 (talk), removing references to manga on the grounds that manga cannot be produced from a non-Japanese citizen (or publisher?). It's been reverted by another editor and myself, but 192.251.134.5 seems to feel strongly about the matter, citing a sentence from the manga article lede, "Manga [...] are comics created in Japan, or by Japanese creators in the Japanese language, conforming to a style developed in Japan in the late 19th century." While Mayhew's work conforms to the style mentioned, I find the nationality-based No_true_Scotsman applied here troubling, the manga article itself might categorize Mayhew's work as localized manga, 192.251.134.5 seems insistent that the article be removed from any Anime/Manga series and must refer to the subject's work only as "comics."

192.251.134.5, your edits are in good faith and I understand the desire to remain technically accurate over what might seem a contentiously applied label, but I would also like to ensure that the sources cited for the Mayhew article reflect the content itself. The article in the periodical Applied Arts refers to the subject's work as manga, as well as receiving recognition at various anime and manga conventions as such, with other sources in the article supporting the label. This is enough, in my opinion per WP:RS to revert the change, but in the meantime, to avoid any confusion and in the interest of avoiding an edit war, I'm changing the references where appropriate to the English-language manga article. But I still feel that the original text, or a modification to link to localized manga, would be the best outcome once this is resolved. I reserve the right to be wrong and to change my mind if necessary. Nmillerche (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * After giving this enough time, I am reverting the article back to "manga," per WP:RS. We should be striving to ensure that the content here matches the Reliable Sources that the content is based on, and I don't see a case for the change in the secondary sources that this article is based on. If editors wish to revert this, please make certain that it is based on a secondary source that is represented in the article, not the interpreted selective reading of a sentence in another Wikipedia article. Nmillerche (talk) 14:42, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion attempt
71.183.247.44 Please review WP guidelines for deletion.. PROD You don't just delete the entire text of an article. Just for your information, just because a page is primary completed by one person doesn't mean that the subject is not notable or that the two know each other. Cap020570 (talk) 01:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * FOLLOW UP--- I removed deletion tag and am requesting dialog here before further attempts at deletion are made.. 71.183.247.44 Mark Arsten thank you!!! Cap020570 (talk) 01:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I checked the guidelines. They are: "Reversion or removal of unencyclopedic material, or of edits covered under the biographies of living persons policy.

Some material—sometimes even factually correct material—does not belong on Wikipedia, and removing it is not vandalism. Check to make sure that the removal was in line with Wikipedia standards, before restoring it or reporting its removal as vandalism."

This article very clearly does not meet the standard for notability. In addition to the repeated links to the subject's own materials, the lack of any evidence of notability in the manga community, the lack of awards, and the single author nature of the article, there is other deceptive, over-inflated material. The subject is noted as a TED fellow, even though she never gave a TED talk and there's no public evidence of anything she actually did as a TED fellow; clearly that does not meet or even help meet the standard of notability required by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.247.44 (talk) 01:56, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

She is very much a TED Fellow - http://fellows.ted.com/profiles/sara-mayhew — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.225.28 (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Please review WP:Notability I believe that this page follows the WP guidelines. Cap020570 (talk) 02:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that this subject is notable and the page should not be deleted. It appears that WP:Contested says that we will need to discuss this formally before any further deletion should take place. Allecher (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Peter Mayhew
Is Sara Mayhew related to the actor Peter Mayhew? If so, that might be something that should be added to the article (sourced, obviously).-Schnurrbart (talk) 15:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure whether she is related, though I can't find any reference to suggest a relation. Separation by a continent doesn't rule it out, though it seems unlikely. Nmillerche (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Notability
Just how does this subject meet the notability guidelines? Viriditas (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Per WP:BASIC, the subject has "been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."


 * I included some primary sources in the article for additional detail, but those obviously do not contribute the way that, say, Northern Arts, TED, etcetera, do. This was a relatively early Wikipedia article of mine, so I'd appreciate any suggestions for its improvement. Thanks Nmillerche (talk) 12:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that this is a non-notable entry and seems to be used for promotional purposes. Perhaps an AfD should commence.


 * Very skeptical (pun intended) about this entry, as it seems to be excessively self promotional. I've tracked down the awards and references: most are minor and seem to have absolutely no standing in the overall comics or publishing community. There is no record of any sales history on the books, one of the books has not even been published after its Kickstarter campaign, the artist has only a handful of supporters on Patreon, and the vast majority of this article is an exhaustive listing of every time this person appears on a podcast. This is conflation at the very least. There just isn't a level of accomplishment to back up the hype here. There are far more influential and accomplished cartoonists who do not get a wiki post every time they speak or go to a convention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayCauseDrowsiness (talk • contribs) 02:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I've done my best to edit the material with a clear eye, to remove promotional bloat, and to add references.MayCauseDrowsiness (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2016 (UTC)MayCauseDrowsiness


 * I did some more digging into why Mayhew's page seemed so bloated and biased. This website makes it clear: a friend of hers whose stated goal is to "...allows us to tie in with the Manga and Anime world, people who might not be aware of skeptics. When her fans look her up they will be exposed to ideas and citations that they hopefully will read.  A major win for us...we have her Wiki back..." to drive interest and traffic toward his group and their concerns. This is completely inappropriate. They were in direct contact with Mayhew to write the page. The website where he discusses the matter is here. http://guerrillaskepticismonwikipedia.blogspot.com/2013/02/ken-feder-sara-mayhew-and-more-updates.html Mayhew has only two local council arts grants and a convention award from a convention that no one ever heard of, and doesn't even come close to meeting an international standard except in naming itself, and is now gone, has nothing to do with Japan, and she has no more than a handful of self published credits to her name. On her website, she claims one book sold a whopping 600 copies. She hasn't produced a finished graphic novel in a decade. And she calls herself a Mangaka? This is an artist of international stature? I don't think so. I'm not going to ask for deletion, but I will be keeping an eye on this page to keep it real. MayCauseDrowsiness (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)MayCauseDrowsiness


 * Thanks for helping edit down the article, MayCauseDrowsiness. This was my first stab at writing a Bio article (alongside Andrew Sprowle). Although I did indeed launch this Wikipedia article, I did not write the blog post you cite above, though I did proceed with writing the article after it was suggested as a worthy endeavor in a WP user group I participated in with several citations to work from.


 * I can certainly understand how you might have found some of the hyperbole in the blog you linked to concerning. But again, I didn't write that, though I typically do contact BLP subjects (if possible) with questions or to request more reliable sources; I don't think there are any WP:Policies prohibiting the practice. This doesn't mean the subject gets to write the article, nor omit/strike any notable negative critical reception (as I've had to politely remind at least one BLP subject whom I've contacted). It just makes it easier to find more reliable sources. I take exception at the notion that the subject simply got one of her buddies (I suppose that would have been me in this case) to write a promotional piece, but I'm sure your concern was placed in good faith.


 * Again, sincere thanks for helping make this more encyclopedic; when I wrote this, I was less discriminating regarding every detail and source. Convention appearances sections, though not unprecedented, aren't as common as I'd thought. And so on. Nmillerche (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * No worries, thanks for writing. I have done my best to be fair and clear here. The original article was completely over the top considering the limited production by this artist, and the minor awards as well. The International Manga Award turns out to be a long-dead promotional event by a local animation studio, not the International Manga Anime annual event in Kyoto as I assumed, and there are two regional government grants. That's it. Paragraphs were devoted to describing one short story of no note whatsoever (and with a link to a virus infected website, which I removed), and a comic that isn't even complete beyond a couple dozen pages. I think I've been as fair as I can be in editing this down. Whoever wrote it, I really don't care at this point, the point is to not let this become a venue for advertising and self promotion. There's just aren't enough accomplishments to back up the bloat here. I can't even find any peer-level, or industry reviews of the work. I spent hours tracking this down, I never heard of this person before, and I teach this subject. If the skeptic community wants to push her as a spokesperson, they can go ahead, but Wikipedia is not the place. MayCauseDrowsiness (talk) 22:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)MayCauseDrowsiness

Non notable
It appears this person is no longer active and can no longer verify actually being a TED fellow. Furthermore, her personal page has no content circa 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.103.51.160 (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

The link for the alleged TED Fellow is also down. The majority TED speaking guests don't have their own personal (promo) page. Given the history with this article which is tons of promo and a push from skeptics for notability, the move for deletion seems appropriate. Given the lack of feedback so far, I'll wait prior to notifying upper management to formally delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.103.51.160 (talk) 22:58, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Discussion is occurring here. 66.103.51.160 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:35, 12 October 2021 (UTC)