Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Tolibao (2nd nomination)

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 keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:01, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey Tolibao[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Try as I might I cannot see how this person passes our Notability threshold. I see an article on a jobbing illustrator performing their job well, but many jobbing illustrators exist and perform their jobs well. What I cannot see is inherent notability

I note that a prior AfD kept the article. This current deletion discussion is the result of a contested CSD Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Fiddle Faddle 07:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:ARTIST sections (1), (3), (4c). [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] // Timothy :: talk 12:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As found in the last AFD he gets significant coverage [6] I click the search for reliable sources link at the top of the AFD and I find this [7] as well. Elsewhere I see people giving brief praise of his work, but those two sources give far more coverage of him. Dream Focus 04:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Only two of the sources above ([8] from interaksyon and [9] from The Philippine Star) seem to be relatively in-depth, third is an interview, others are just mentions in passing. This is very borderline and right now I am on the fence. Can anyone find better sources? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 04:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep per above. Apple731a (talk) 08:35, 1 August 2020 (UTC)~~ Struck !vote from blocked disruption-only account editing here to WP:GAME autoconfirmed. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 06:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 01:02, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:SIGCOV as shown by the Phillipines Star article and Yahoo article, among others. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm always wary around WP:BLP articles because they can start to be a magnet for inaccuracies or worse. I did find this other source from another regional publication, and it's not clear it meets the standard for reliability. I need editors more well-versed in this type of article to make the call. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Today I left neutrally worded talk page notices on the Wikiprojects related to the Delsort categories above, to try and get more input. // Timothy :: talk 17:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ [10] is the best I could find, and it's not WP:SIGCOV. (Here b/c of TB's message; confirming that it was not canvassing :)) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 17:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Now weak delete per Toughpigs's sources. I'm not convinced by Interaksyon (no byline, extravagant claims, looks like a gossip site), but I am convinced by the article in the Philippine Star. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 18:04, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This Phillipine Star article is a lengthy profile of Tolibao. This Interaksyon/Phillipine Star interview is in-depth. (I don't think the "it's an interview" argument makes sense here; it's a sign that Tolibao is a person worth interviewing.) Same for this Yahoo News article. — Toughpigs (talk) 17:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: Article is poorly sourced and some links mentioning is coverage aren't really reliable, such as podcasts and Yahoo! News. I could not find any news feature that highlights and reviews specific works that he is known for. lullabying (talk) 22:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this article meets our notability standard with reliable sources. If the article is poorly sourced, that is a reason to improve, not delete. Wm335td (talk) 23:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the Yahoo article tips the scales, along with a few other sources that are at least borderline. Should be rewritten to ensure no WP:BLP violations. Jontesta (talk) 14:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep since subject passes, if barely, WP:NCREATIVE as well as WP:GNG. We have a profile in The Philippine Star, another profile in InterAksyon, another in Yahoo News, and a report about a creative-arts conference where our subject was a "key speaker." Then there's an article in Comics Beat magazine about the game Magic: The Gathering whose creator and also our subject is featured prominently throughout. He scratches the bar and makes it shake and rattle but he clears the jump. -The Gnome (talk) 15:05, 22 August 2020 (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.