Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean Simmans


 * 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 userfy userfied to User:Hiding/Sean Simmans as per the discussion Gnangarra 07:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Sean Simmans

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Rizzo was just deleted via Articles for deletion/Rizzo as non-notable. There's nothing here to indicate that the comic strip's author meets WP:BIO. (The strip's co-author was similarly found non-notable.) &mdash; Scientizzle 22:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See my comment below...the closing admin could consider this "sort of withdrawn" if he or she likes. &mdash; Scientizzle 16:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 03:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom; subject has no claim to notability. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions.  -- Hiding T 10:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep based on the understanding that Rizzo is syndicated. I'd like the chance to explore that, and if it is the case I think the deletion of Rizzo needs further examination. Hiding T 18:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Hiding. Hobit (talk) 09:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no significant coverage by reputable independent sources for anything in the article, including claims of working for a syndicate. --Dragonfiend (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment A Google search for Rizzo "Sean Simmans" doesn't bear much fruit. There are no secondary sources available about Simmans or his strip. The Rizzo site lists four pieces of "press" and they all look terribly trivial. I can't find anything to back up the claim that the syndication of Rizzo in "over twenty newspapers across the United States"...There just isn't much to go on here for a proper encyclopedia article, and notability is not met in my opinion. &mdash; Scientizzle 21:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The strip is syndicated per . I think that the article can therefore be kept per our editing policy, maintained in an acceptable state and allowed to eventually blossom. The same goes for the sadly deleted Rizzo article.  Let's remember that our policies supercede our guidance, and that as long as articles are verifiable and of a neutral view, we're okay. Hiding T 15:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I saw that SLCW link at the Rizzo AfD. As a source, it could be properly used to state that "Simmans, a book/magazine-cover and webzine illustrator, resides in Canada. Rizzo has been published in the Salt Lake City Weekly." That's not a strong WP:BIO statement, IMO. I've found nothing else reliable and independent. And I haven't located the other 19(+?) newspapers in which Rizzo is alleged to be published. &mdash; Scientizzle 22:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * But that's my point. We've probably got enough on Rizzo for this to be redirected there.  The deletion happened the wrong way, this should have been deleted and Rizzo kept. We can assert that Rizzo is a syndicated strip, we can further assert a number of things from primary source on behalf of Rizzo, and that's excluding non-web based sources.  If we avoid systemic bias and base this afd and others on what we can find on the web, then I think the best thing to do, in line with our editing policy, is to move to Rizzo (comics), clean up and keep, with an eye on merging to a list of strips syndicated in the 2000s.  Although I think there is a flaw in Wikipedia when we can't work as an encyclopedia of comics and comic strips, something guided in the guideline on summary style and policy that Wikipedia is not paper.  If an article can be written which meets our policies, why should simple guidance over-rule that? Hiding T 15:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Rizzo can also be verified to run in the Sunday Logan Herald Journal, . Hiding T 15:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The debate over Riseley's article is equally flawed, ignoring the fact that the subject has written for Buzz Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, The Press Democrat and The Salt Lake Tribune. Might have been a different outcome had the proper research demanded of nominators been undertaken. Hiding T 15:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you have a reasonable case for a deletion reveiw for Rizzo, and I would argue that perhaps the best solution would be to restore Rizzo and merge in these two bios. I could support that. &mdash; Scientizzle 16:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll just put it in the to do pile. I respect the fact that this isn't a bureaucracy. And policy is that we can recreate better articles, just not exact copies.  I'll try and work this up over the holiday period. Hiding T 12:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, the plan would be to restore the other two articles, move them all to Rizzo (comics) and delete and restore to bring page history together, instate redirects at the author pages and have a short stub on Rizzo which covers the sources, adding a link to List of comic strips. Hiding T 12:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Userfy=>User:Hiding/Sean Simmans, requesting merge=>Rizzo comic article&mdash;this would facilitate Hiding's work on the set of related articles. I am of the opinion that Sean Simmans' notability if inextricably tied to the Rizzo comic and, therefore, information about Mr. Simmans should reside in that article. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 16:42, 21 December 2007 (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.