Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Cottle


 * 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   delete. Black Kite (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Steve Cottle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails all notability guidelines. samrolken (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 February 26.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  03:58, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:BIO. Unable to find any independent, reliable sources for this person. - MrX 04:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename/Move - With very minor reworking, this article could be an article about the I Love Comix Archive, which I think meets the notability criteria. Some of the external links already on the page show how it is referenced by numerous blogs.  It's pretty easy to find references to the archive in blogs (ScoopWeb, Daily Ink, The Stripper's Guide) and it's also referenced in numerous wikipedia articles.  It's used as a resource by other comic strip archives such as this Mandrake the Magician archive.  I focus on comic books rather than comic strips so I don't have any strip reprint collections to check and see if it gets any credits in those, but that might be worth a look when deciding whether the archive itself is a notable topic. - Ixat totep (talk) 17:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Of your three blog references 1) Is not a blog and is a Wikipedia mirror, 2) Doesn't mention the archive at all, someone in the blog's comments section mentions it... and 3) Doesn't cover the archive at all, just mentions it in passing. samrolken (talk) 17:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I spent about 5 minutes trying to find stuff before running off to work because someone brought the page to my attention. I did think I'd filtered out the Wikipedia clone, so that's embarrassing.  But my point was the raise the rename possibility, which I've done. If I have a chance I'll try to look up better sources, but really my area of expertise is comic books and not comic strips. Ixat totep (talk) 05:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

wayland (talk) 22:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename/Move - I'm astonished that this article was created around Steve Cottle instead of around the ilovecomix archive. The archive itself is clearly the more notable topic. I say rename/move the article.
 * Comment: Can you help us establish the notability of the ilovecomix comic archive? Thanks. samrolken (talk) 01:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Reply: Well, there is this page at kickstarter which shows over $8,000 pledged by 57 supporters achieved by March 9, 2011.


 * and there's a blog entry which bemoans the loss of the ilovecomix archive when it temporarily went offline from its previous web address.


 * Another blog here refers to the ilovecomix archive (at the previous address before the funding was achieved) in glowing terms.


 * A company calling itself "http://pediapress.com/" claims to sell "Wikipedia" books from "Wiki content". This appears, on the surface, to be a worrying development since it could mean someone might make money from articles we have written or contributed to in good faith. One of the books offered is on Google Books “American comic strips before 1918” for US$ 31.39. This "American Comic Strips Before 1918" book makes 6 references to the ilovecomix archive. Notable but worrying...


 * Forbidden Planet is the most famous comic book and sci-fi related shop in London, England and has been around for many years. They mention the ilovecomix archive on their blog


 * "Grantbridge Street and Other Misadventures" is a very well liked blog for comic fans and mentions the ilovecomix archive, describing it as "absolutely cracking"

wayland (talk) 08:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - I discovered that the user who initiated this Articles for deletion (Afd) action, samrolken -- is actually a close personal friend of the subject of the article, Steve Cottle.

Mr. Cottle was interviewed extensively and the two of them have been friends for over 15 years. In fact, samrolken's only connection with Mr. Cottle is his personal friendship. samrolken apparently has no interest in comics and no appreciation of them as an artform.

Mr. Cottle and samrolken engaged in a text chat on Facebook on the evening of Feb. 25th, during which time samrolken decided to initiate the Afd and told his friend that he was going to see to it that it would be deleted and would be gone in seven days.

"You should not create or edit articles about ... your close friends. ... You should also not write about people with whom you could reasonably be said to have an antagonistic relationship in real life."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest

Extensive interviewing of Mr. Cottle, as well as a detailed review of the chat transcipt confirm that not only was samrolken a close friend, but there was clearly antagonism during the chat, which timestamp records from Facebook and Wikipedia show that samrolken initiated the Afd while chatting with the subject.

"Wikipedia:Vandalism

"Abuse of tags

"Bad-faith placing of non-content tags such as {afd} ... or other tags on pages that do not meet such criteria."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism

Inasmuch as samrolken's sole nexus related to this article was his friendship with the subject, and the Conflict of Interest (CoI) is clearcut and blatant, yet hidden in this Afd page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Steve_Cottle

a reasonable conclusion would be that this is simply an act of vandalism, which should be prohibited, rejected, and rapidly withdrawn.

Drhankh (talk) 23:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Sangorshop) (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Drhankh (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. samrolken (talk) 17:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 *  Keep or Rename - While the page is poorly done, Steve Cottle is indeed notable in the comic strip collecting and history community. Notability is defined by Wikipedia as "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded" and specifically " The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.". The peers in this case would be comic strip historians, a group that has not yet had anyone suggest this page for deletion.  I don't know Steve myself (other than what I've read on his Wikipedia page), but I certainly do know the reputation  of his archive - a wonderful source, and one that is indeed cited in current research.  Certainly Steve doesn't have the importance of Bill Blackbeard or  Allen Holtz, but to delete his article (or  archives) by non-peers is like putting non-sports fans in charge of the sports articles. Sangorshop 00:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangorshop (talk • contribs)
 * Delete I'm unable to find reliable sources to meet GNG, open to WP:Heyman save. Insomesia (talk) 03:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as advertising. He may possibly be notable, though the sources do not really seem adequate,  but this article is so much devoted to advertising his services that it is radically unacceptable. a list of the comics he hosts on his site is improper promotional content. A list of the items he sends in response to donations is promotional content. A detailed reprint of the takedown notices he has been sent, while not exactly promotional, is nonetheless   not encyclopedic content. I note the illustration is non-free content with a totally inadequate justification: to illustrate his work as collector. That's absurd--we use such strips to indicate better than words can do the work of the artist or creator, It serves no point as indicating the work of a collector or the operation of an archive.  I've tagged it for speedy deletion as "clearly invalid fair use tag"; if someone challenges it, it will presumably have the usual discussion before it gets deleted.--DGG 21:48, 3 March 2013‎
 * Delete  Keep AND Rename ilovecomix archive  and add actual reliable sources and remove all current sources as NON RS. Per Andrew Lenahan below.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as it is currently written; per DGG - WP:NOTPROMOTION — Ched : ?  07:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable, advertising, self-promotion, lack of reliable sources. It's an all-you-can-eat bad article buffet.  Even if his site were notable (and, as far as I can tell based on the article, it isn't) that wouldn't make him notable anyway. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

Hello, Starblind, you wrote "advertising, self-promotion." Only three people who have commented here (in this Afd) actually either know Steve Cottle or about him. The others apparently only from this article. The three are samrolken, who initiated this Afd, myself, and Sangorshop. samrolken is a close personal friend of Steve Cottle. samrolken has no expertise or interest in comics. (Source, recent letter he posted and appended at dailydose, second source, interview of Steve Cottle, transcript kept). Sangorshop and I have expertise in comics. His expertise far exceeds mine. We have both known of Steve Cottle for years. Sangorshop and I have both been to Mr. Cottle's archive and understand its value. I have been acquainted with Sangorshop for several years, and what he says is extremely reliable. I conducted an extensive interview of Mr. Cottle plus have further written documentation. According to him, he did NOT write this article about him. He was not at all involved in the writing of it, nor was he contacted or interviewed for it. As far as I can ascertain, this is the truth. So there is no "self-promotion." As to "advertising" there's none of that, because the archive is not for the purpose of making money, and access is for free. I hope these comments are helpful. I do not claim it is the best article that could be written, but an article is better than no article. As to the notability issue, I will address that soon. -- Drhankh (talk) 17:31, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

"Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Drhankh has been canvassed to this discussion. samrolken 17:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)"

"Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Sangorshop) has been canvassed to this discussion. samrolken 17:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)"

According to my records, the first of these was inserted by samrolken about myself, Drhankh, the second about Sangorshop. As far as I can tell, when samrolken refers to "An editor" he is referring to himself in third-person. There is absolutely no merit to these charges.

As to Sangorshop, he was aware of the situation pertaining to the Steve Cottle, inasmuch as Sangorshop is a member of a Yahoo group called dailydose (that samrolken joined on March 2nd, the same date as his comments, and posted his message using his real name, and appended a copy of his private email letter that he'd sent to Mr. Cottle, a letter that Mr. Cottle and samrolken both told me had been sent). dailydose shares old newspaper comics strip scans.

Mr. Cottle had posted a message to Scanarama and dailydose about the situation regarding the article, its proposed deletion, and it being initiated by his friend, e.g., samrolken. Mr. Cottle did not ask for any help, just comments, but was clearly distressed. Even though I had read many of his comments over the years, had come across the Cottle article on Jan. 9th and downloaded a copy and found it interesting and useful, I was one of the last persons at Scanarama to post a comment, which wasn't to Mr. Cottle's original message, but to another member's, though I did respond to some of Mr. Cottle's questions in my reply message.

Sangorshop replied to a member at dailydose, who wanted to post a Keep comment here (this Afd) but didn't know how. Sangorshop did reply and explained briefly how to do it. I later responded as well and shared the instructions MrX gave me (at his Talk page).

Sangorshop never told anyone he was going to post any Keep comments, nor that he had done so afterwards. It was a complete surprise to me. I only discovered them here.

Mr. Cottle never asked me to help him. I reached out to him initially for further information, doing so with a short personal email letter. Something seemed clearly amiss, because it seemed odd to all of us (all the members from the two groups who bothered to comment) that a friend of Mr. Cottle's would propose to delete the article about him.

It also struck me as a likely conflict of interest for samrolken, as both an editor and a close personal friend of the subject of the article, to be the person who recommends it's deletion.

I asked some questions via email, Mr. Cottle requested use of a text chat program. Once I was convinced that it maintained a written transcript, I agreed to participate, and I interviewed him for several hours and developed a fully documented record, not to share here, but in case there are any questions about truthfulness and accuracy. Steve Cottle never canvassed or recruited me in the least. Rather, there seemed to be an injustice occurring, there didn't seem to be anyone else either able, available or willing, and as a long-standing Wikipedia editor (since 2009), as someone who knew his work, and his notability, felt that I was the only person available to attempt to rectify this injustice. So I simply assigned the task to myself. I am not working for anyone and am a free agent, but I hope my efforts help ensure both a correct outcome, and help other editors understand the pertinent issues. More dealing with notability soon. -- Drhankh (talk) 18:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

In a nutshell, is Steve Cottle notable? His friend and the editor who initiated this Afd, has consistently said no, but he admits he's not interested in comics.

"No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition .... Sources of evidence include recognized peer reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally."

"Neutral sources are also needed to guarantee a neutral article can be written ..."

"If an article fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself, or: - Ask the article's creator or an expert on the subject for    advice on where to look for sources.  - Place a  tag on the article to alert other editors.  - If the article is about a specialized field, use the     tag with a specific WikiProject to attract    editors knowledgeable about that field, who may have access to    reliable sources not available online." Unfortunately, samrolken, the editor who initiated this Afd, hasn't paid attention to ALL the pertinent guidelines.

As far as I can tell, no attempt was made to contact the creator of the article, which I would have done.

No tags were added to seek out editors with any expertise, which was sorely needed here. If the editors, such as samrolken, have no expertise regarding a presumed leader is a specialized field, and no attempt is made to solicit expertise, you have 'editing' (to delete) by a committee with no expertise and not sufficient to render a proper judgment.

Steve Cottle has expertise in newspaper comics an comic strips and in the preservation of them.

Only Sangorshop and I have any expertise in these areas, of the editors involved so far. Sangorshop's comments are entirely correct. From my detailed interview of Mr. Cottle, his expertise was very well demonstrated. From samrolken's letter, he admits lacking any interest in comics, and has no expertise. More to follow. -- Drhankh (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

Steve Cottle is notable for two basic interrelated ideas and achievements.

Newspaper comics, because of where they are published, tended to be discarded. There was no generalized attempt to save them and to make them available for future audiences. It is similiar to the situations of DuMont's TV shows being trashed, and the BBC wiping many early Doctor Who shows, making them something of just somewhat distant memories of the people who saw those shows.

A similar fate could have occurred to newspaper comics. Mr. Cottle developed a strong appreciation for them as a true art form, and newspaper comics do have a very devoted following, and all of them agree that it's an art form worth preserving.

Some libraries archived local newspapers onto microfilm and microfiche, and some newspapers, such as England's Daily Mirror, maintained records of the comics they locally published, such as Giles, which are reprinted in books.

And while libraries have the microfilm, these are not too accessible to the public at large.

There are some archives for some things, and there are some collectors with collections of certain strips, like Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers.

But there are far too many strips that were orphaned. The strip ended, wasn't as widely circulated, and with the material being dated, was considered to no longer have any value and not worthwhile to the syndicate who created and marketed it, to bother with preservation.

Even if a company was interested in preservation of the original artwork and stories, over time companies cease to exist, change hands, office space changes, and the material tends to get discards. To them, it was a business. They didn't consider it their responsibility to save the material.

Steve Cottle got the big, brilliant idea, an idea that NO ONE else had, to collect and preserve all newspaper comics.

Not only did he get the idea, he started implementing it. More to come. -- Drhankh (talk) 19:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

Steve Cottle persisted with his vision, remarkable and far ahead of anyone else, and gained followers, those who understood and appreciate his vision. They helped him gather and scan newspaper comic strips.

Steve Cottle developed one of the largest and best independent newspaper comics archive anywhere, ilovecomix, with a renowned reputation within the comics community. He is well-known, well- regarded, and well-appreciated.

Articles, like those here, for Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers, are certainly good, but every article is based up memories and the original source material. There's always a first article on any subject.

Unfortunately, it's hard to write articles when the source material no longer exists and the people who remember it (from reading or watching it) are all dead.

What Steve Cottle is doing is preserving original source material, and that is invaluable to researchers, which I will shortly demonstrate. -- Drhankh (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Retain Comments (not a vote)

Several years ago, I obtained a copy of a document written by Arthur Lortie. Mr. Lortie is an engineer who is also interested in science fiction, including comic books and comic strips. In particular, he is fan of Flash Gordon, and has written an article about this rather well-known SF character, who first appeared in a newspaper strip, and later in three movie serials, a TV series, a radio show, a movie and other media. From Mr. Lortie I discovered Connie, a newspaper comic strip that eventially delved into science fiction plotlines that were quite interesting.

From Mr. Lortie, I also learned that there was a science fiction comic strip named Chris Welkin, Planeteer, starting in the early 1950s. Mr. Lortie apparently didn't have much information it but was seeking more. The only images we had were from scans of three covers of Australian comic books that had apparently contained material reprinted from this U.S. strip.

I was really curious to what it was about, but I could find out very little information, including no article.

For the longest time, besides what Mr. Lortie had written, I could find only two sources that verified the strip had indeed existed, but not what it was about.

The article "Winterbotham, Russell (1904-1971)" pp.703-704 in The World Encyclopedia of Comics (Maurice Horn, ed., 1976), confirmed that established SF author R.R. Winterbotham had written the strip, but there was little description of it.

List of newspaper comic strips A-F - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia confirmed too that the strip had existed.


 * Chris Welkin, Planeteer (1952-1964) by Art Sansom and Russ Winterbotham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspaper_comic_strips_A %E2%80%93F

But there was no article in Wikipedia.

What was the story line, what were the characters, what was the setting, where was it published?

All mysteries.

I could find out no futher information for a very long time.

Until one day when I got an email Steve Cottle had sent to a Yahoo group, mentioning his archive, telling us he'd moved it and how to access it, for free.

I reasoned that if anyone had information or scans of this strip, it would be Mr. Cottle.

And sure enough, he had them.

So for the very first time, I could actually see what the strip looked like, read it and see what it was about and truly appeciate the art form and the treasure that Mr. Cottle had rescued from oblivion, a resource that could be read and enjoyed, and also used for first hand research for anyone to write the first sorely missing Chris Welkin, Planeteer article.

Without that archive, writing anything more was virtually impossible.

Just recently, after interviewing Mr. Cottle, I was able to find and download scans of this strip in good quality for the years 1951-54.

With the strips in hand, I was able to learn that the correct title of the strip was "Chris Welkin, Planeteer" NOT "Chris Welkin - Planeteer" as the List of newspaper comic strips A-F had previously stated for a long time, and I corrected it.

I also learned that the strip was published by the NEA Service, which later become United Media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Media

That article could use updating.

I also saw that others were emulated Mr. Cottle, and when some years ago, only he had any material on Chris Welkin, Planeteer, sources have since branched out, information and scans are being shared. I found an article announcing the new strip, and a book by artist Art Sansom, mentioning working on the strip.

There are those of us in the comics community that truly appeciate this material and recognize it as an art form, well worth preserving.

Regarding the Steve Cottle article, it's part of a greater effort.

"This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a

collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on

Wikipedia."

"This article is supported by the Comic strips work group."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Steve_Cottle

I have already pointed out how we need an article on Chris Welkin, Planeteer.

Elsewhere I wrote how I edited the Buster Crabbe article to add that he starred in a TV series, Captain Gallant of the Foreign Legion, nowhere mentioned in the article.

I kept tabs on the article from time to tab, and others helped flesh out the Buster Crabbe article, and later someone wrote a Captain Gallant of the Foreign Legion article.

Just because the Steve Cottle article has some flaws, doesn't mean non-experts should be deciding to discard it, as Sangershop pointed out.

Someone other than Mr. Cottle recognized his value and got the ball rolling.

Real experts like Sangershop and I could probably improve it a great deal, if we were sufficiently motivated, but this artificial deadline that soon expires is unnecessary. The Afd should be withdrawn.

I edited List of newspaper comic strips A-F; where is the footnote for Chris Welkin, Planeteer? Where do the years of publication come from? Are they accurate?

I don't know, but I do know that someone most likely in good faith, believed the information was accurate.

There as a mistake in the title of the strip, but the strip itself proved to be real.

Why is there this suspicion that the information presented here from people with true expertise is discounted rather than accepted. We do know what we tell you, and the rest of you don't know this subject area. Experts should be solicited.

Recently, samrolken had initiated an Afd on the article for Russell R. Winterbotham, author of the Welkin strip, an article that I had updated.

I added useful information. I didn't bother adding footnotes. I don't come to Wikipedia to read footnotes, or to add them. I haven't written articles, I read them, I learn things, and I get value out of my time. Occasionally I make use of the footnotes. If someone else is interested in writing articles or adding footnotes, they can do so.

I didn't write the Steve Cottle or Russell R. Winterbotham articles, but I do know about the subjects.

After several of us shared our thoughts on the Afd for Russell R. Winterbotham, samrolken voluntarily chose to withdraw it.

Not every subject is as well-documented as it should be, but then we don't all have an infinite amount of time. A flawed article is far superior to none,

I submit that doing likewise for this article would be in everyone's best interest. -- Drhankh (talk) 20:50, 4 March 2013 (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.