Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip zdarsky

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chip zdarsky[edit]

Chip zdarsky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Appears to be a blatant hoax. The one source offers a date of death of 2038, and no other assertion of notability which can be verified is offered. Tyrenon (talk) 20:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged it for CSD as blatant hoax. Passportguy (talk) 20:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]
We may have been a bit quick on this one, as the author has now posted a source which seems to be genuine (http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/afterword/archive/2009/05/07/toronto-comic-arts-festival-2009-q-amp-a-with-chip-zdarsky.aspx). However it is still questionable if this person (whatever his real name may be) is sufficiently notable. Passportguy (talk) 20:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How exactly anyone can make the claim that Chip Zdarsky, as a popular regular writer for a national newspaper, is not "notable," yet there are lengthy articles about Sectaurs: Warriors of Symbion and Manimal defies comprehension. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.247.198 (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC) — 65.92.247.198 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I've had the "pleasure" of meeting Chip Zdarsky several times and I can assure everyone here that he is real but most definitely not as notable as Sectaurs. 99.233.100.79 (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC) — 99.233.100.79 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

hi: just wanted to let you know i've updated the article with more references to a variety of his published works, and also another article stating his popularity. hopefully this will help turn the tide when a decision has been made on this article. i plan to flush it out still more, but have to sign off for tonight. i have done some clicking around though and can assure you that the toronto comics scene is vibrant and notable and there are people who will be happy to find chip zdarsky listed here. i will also be doing an entry for j. bone, and other comics creators. Wiki leedetailed (talk) 22:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]

i also wanted to let you know that i have added a redirect but it is only because there was a lower case z in zdarsky. more and more i believe that this is the right name for the entry because this is comics persona. my example of Carrot Top seems to be a viable one. anyway, will research more secondary sources as soon as possible but i would like to note that there are several other canadian comic artists in that list that would probably demur to be on the list when chip zdarsky is not, and that there are several articles there that are not as fleshed out as this one is.. Wiki leedetailed (talk) 23:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]

i would like to note that Passport guy has warned against the use of "sockpuppeting" in this matter. in short, i let friends know i was working on an article re: chip zdarsky for wikipedia -- my first! and that it might be deleted. it is likely that these friends took it upon themselves to champion the article. as i have noted above, toronto has a well-respected and thriving comics community and they would find it hard not to see chip as notable. i however, would like to state implicitly here that i have not asked anybody to champion this article, and have been trying to comply with all suggestions that have been made for its improvement by Passport guy. the thing about chip zdarsky is he is unique and crazy and to list him as his birth name "steve murray" would be like calling harpo marx, adolph marx, his real name. chip zdarsky is chip zdarsky which is likely why he was first looked at by wikipedia as a hoax whereas he is instead an incredibly talented artist and writer. Wiki leedetailed (talk) 23:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's now been established that this isn't a hoax, so that matter can be dropped. A deletion discussion should mainly focus on notability and whether references are verifiable. His main claim to notability is writing for the National Post, where he's credited by his real name, Steve Murray. If the result of this discussion is keep, the article should be renamed Steve Murray, with a redirect from Chip Zdarsky. It should be noted that Murray writes for the National Post's blog, as opposed to its print edition. This wouldn't necessarily make him less notable, but it may explain a lack of third-party sources. I'm remaining neutral for the moment: I'm not convinced that there is enough to establish notability at this time. freshacconci talktalk 00:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as the article does not appear to meet the minium requiremenst as spelled out in WP:N. The references are all to works by this person, but there does not appear to be much independent material published ABOUT this person, so it does not appear that anyone writing for a reliable source finds him particularly notable. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep i'm back again to give my final argument in favour of this article. i authored it because i am convinced of chip zdarsky's notability. i have every intention of doing more toronto-based comic artist articles because i do think that they are notable, and that toronto is acknowledged as a hub in the comic book industry, as evidenced by the very successful toronto comic art festival (which incidentally i also plan to create an article for, since it shockingly is not listed in wikipedia) which chip zdarsky was a significant part of this year, on panels with significant comic people like scott mccloud and paul pope. if you look at the other q&a with toronto comic artists (at least a dozen that were done in the Post's series about the toronto comic art festival), you will see that several cite chip zdarsky as someone that is notable([[1]][2][3][4][5]). this last article, entitled Christopher Butcher discusses the Toronto Comic Arts Festival: “Toronto is, to be honest, one of the greatest comic cities in North America."[6]gives an overview of the festival by one of the founders where he ironically references "some guy" chip zdarsky's prison funnies launch which was merged with doug wright awards this year. my feeling is that the people who think this article should be deleted were firstly thrown off by the improbable name of chip zdarsky and then concluded he was not notable because they were unfamiliar with his work and influence. Writing about these people and events will only enrich the wikipedia, not defuse it, and educate the people who are unaware of the contributions that are being made to this art form in my city. this is not a personal argument. i am not personally upset that my first article for wikipedia might be deleted. but i do think you would be doing a disservice to this community by disregarding one of its influences as not notable and worthy of deletion. Wiki leedetailed (talk) 05:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]
  • Weak Delete it isn't the name--we're quite used to odd names for real people, and especially to odd pen names for writers in certain generes. Rather, an article whose bio reads "It is said he was born in Barrie Ontario, to a set of parents, and has an uncle, named Melvin Zdarsky[6], who charms women and men, young and old. " will inevitably be suspected of being either a hoax or puffery. There is no evidence in the article that any of the work is significant. The only substantial reference is the interview cited here with him [7] in connection with the festival. I'm not sure that's enough. DGG (talk) 18:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment thank you for your feedback. nobody has mentioned that line would be controversial up to this point, so i can change it to be less jocular -- it was meant to be in the spirit of the character chip zdarsky. i am in the process of looking for more secondary sources, but life keeps getting in the way. i don't want to cite precedent because i don't want to cause a raft of deletions on wikipedia but i have bumped into several articles in the course of this discussion that i would consider much less fleshed out than this one, for comic book artists, and they seemed to have passed the "significant" and "notable" test. either that or the people who vetted them were not as diligent. in any event, i'm not referencing them because i think that they're significant, and they should be here. is there a time limit on how long i have to find further secondary references? Wiki leedetailed (talk) 19:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]
      • Deletion discussions last 7 days. I should also point out that one guideline for AfD discussions is that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. In other words, the existence of an article that does not seem to be up to Wikipedia standards can't be used as a reason to keep this one. There are plenty of articles that are sub-par, that should not be here, or that need much improvement. We tend to focus on the article at hand and not worry about the others (right now). freshacconci talktalk 20:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment thank you for that information. i wasn't trying to use my discoveries as an argument per se, but thank you for clarifying the guidelines for me. i am still having trouble understanding how you rate notability. in my last defence of the article, i listed five different q&as which referenced zdarsky, as well as an article that makes it clear that the toronto comic community finds him notable. some of the articles of the wikipedia seem rarefied to *me* but it is because i am unfamiliar with the genres and the people, not because these aren't notable people. at this point, i am not sure what i can do to convince you that this is a notable person. he writes for a national newspaper. he has been published. he makes a large contribution to the comics community in toronto. i think the links i have provided show this already. i am worried about spending a significant amount of time looking for more secondary references, only to have the article deleted. it is also discouraging because i have plans to do more articles around this community but i'm starting to feel that if i do those they might also been seen as not notable. i guess this is the chance you take when you are trying to help develop a resource in an area where there hasn't heretofore been a lot of effort made? Wiki leedetailed (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]
      • Reply I can't speak for everyone here, but I can certainly say that the last thing I'd want to do is discourage someone from continuing work here, especially around under-represented areas. I can certainly understand your frustration, and we all started at some point. I've had editors question the notability of an artist simply because they'd never heard of them (again, that would be a bad argument to make in a discussion and a good administrator would ignore it). What you are looking for is substantial third-party coverage. Yes, he's published in a national newspaper, but so are many others who do not have articles. What we need is coverage in publications and other media that have no connection to the subject. Is there any magazine coverage, articles and so on? Other newspapers? Substantial TV coverage? The two main guidelines we go by are notability and a subcategory on creative professionals. If the closing administrator decides on delete, the article can be userfied so you can keep it and work on improving it. Articles can always be recreated as long they are improved in some way. I'd also suggest working on a more general article on the Toronto comics scene if there's a great deal of coverage out there. This may be a more successful way of writing about this topic and from there you can branch out to individual artists. freshacconci talktalk 20:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Reply again, i appreciate this -- i am learning a lot. i am definitely decided that my next article will be on the toronto comic art festival itself which hopefully will be easier to document and verify. i have already started to collect resources for it. we'll see how that is received, and go on from there. in the meantime, i have a few more links to include that i think i can easily get tomorrow for this entry, and will migrate it to my personal space if it is decided against, as you suggest. Wiki leedetailed (talk) 01:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)Wiki leedetailed[reply]
  • Delete I agree with DGG's reasoning here. He's been published but that doesn't automatically make someone notable. freshacconci talktalk 18:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply What do you make of the interviews with other Toronto artists who mention him? Thses aren't him being published, it's him being mentioned by other creators in the field. Here's him being referenced by Warren Ellis. http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=6786 Lot 49atalk 21:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's the issue that the coverage has to be substantial and not merely incedental. Its not sufficient to find a person's name mentioned in independent references, one must show that those references provide enough information to add meaningful, indepth content to the article. Read WP:N for more details on this. We need to be certain that there exists enough independent coverage of a subject that we can provide a balanced neutral view of a subject. If there is little meaningful independent writing about this subject, then it is impossible to write and reference an article that meets out core policies of verifiability, neutrality, and being published elsewhere first. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - It's one of the many articles on wikipedia that is non notabale. DeletionMojoMan (talk) 00:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chip_zdarsky&oldid=1137705765"