Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Harrison (comic artist)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 02:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Mark Harrison (comic artist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

DELETE. Fails WP:BLP and WP:N, with a distinct lack of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. JBsupreme ( talk ) ✄ ✄ ✄	 15:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  —J Greb (talk) 13:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  —J Greb (talk) 13:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Well established british comicbook artist with a long history of work. Article could do with some better sources but is esentially sound, and has sources sufficent to meet WP:N (Lambiek etc...) Not seeing any particular BLP issues Artw (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete- six sources, of which none are sufficient to meet WP:N. There's two blogs, one thing that Harrison wrote himself, a passing mention on some comic that Harrison could not get published and has had to self-publish online. The least insubstantial of these sources is a single paragraph on the Lambiek thing, and just looking at that site makes me doubt its reliability. Reyk  YO!  00:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The Lambiek Comiclopedia is actually pretty well established and respected. It's been used as a reference multiple times on Wikipedia. Artw (talk) 04:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep If someone's work is notable, then they are notable for creating it. As for coverage, searching the news archives for his name and "comic book" I find some results.  The Washington Times one can be used to verify he is the comic book artist who did work on the Ultimates first issue.  Of course that information can be found on Marvel's official website, listing the credits.  The Altanta Journal article seems to be about some of his work.  Its pay-per-view so I can't access it, only the summary listed in the Google news search.   D r e a m Focus  00:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:NOTINHERITED. Someone's work being notable does not necessarily equate to the person being notable. Reyk  YO!  01:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure the Atlanta Journal article is not about him, FWIW. Plenty of other sources out there to add to the article though. Artw (talk) 02:50, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The Washington Times piece does appear to cover his work (I'd guess Glimmer rats or Durham Red) but access looks tricky
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per Reyk. The sources in this article do not establish notability per WP:N.    Snotty Wong   converse 04:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Reyk and Snottywong, there's simply not enough coverage for him to meet the WP:GNG. Doesn't seem to meet WP:CREATIVE either. Claritas § 13:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Artw. BOZ (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If this person has been the subject of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications please leave me a note on my talk page and I will withdraw this nomination. "Comiclopedia", "Comic Book DB", and a bunch of other blogs and directory sites don't really pass muster.   JBsupreme  ( talk ) ✄ ✄ ✄	 15:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * While databases (and other tertiary sources aren't a sing of notability, as their remit is clearly to include as much as possible) Lambiek and their Comiclopedia is reliable and inclusion there can be seen a sign of an artist's importance (as they don't try to be comprehensive, focusing on the bigger names), especially for European artists where coverage might not be as extensive as American artists. (Emperor (talk) 16:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC))
 * Keep I'm still working on digging out the sources - there is a solid interview (in print and not online as far as I can tell) and good coverage in Thrill Power Overload (about the history of 2000AD) - there are also a pretty impressive review . I would like to see more on his concept work but that should be enough to get a well rounded article out of this, Lambiek helps as I mention above (there is also a mini-profile from John Freeman (an expert on British comics) which summarises his importance: "a stunning talent whose work towers above many other fully painted art strip creators" ). io9 called Loose Cannons "the best sci-fi comic that you've never seen" . I might suggest a move to Mark Harrison (artist) if this is kept as "comic artist" isn't really in line with WP:NCC (although there are a few others around). (Emperor (talk) 16:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC))
 * Oh and WP:BEFORE #3 - no attempt was made to flag concerns about this article. (Emperor (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC))
 * Keep, exactly as as per Emperor. Vizjim (talk) 04:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.