Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Troy Boyle
- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:26, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Troy Boyle[edit]
- Troy Boyle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Yes, I know, this unsourced BLP has been around since 2007. But why it has is beyond me. He currently "works on pinups and covers" and used to be a comic book artist. But I can't find a single article on this person in Google News, except for one in USA Today that refers to his presidency of the non-notable National Atheist Party, and says that he is "a corporate legal representative for a finance company," not a comic book artist, which is the only conceivable claim this person has to notability. See [1], the article itself is not accessible. This looks suspiciously like an autobiography, as it was created by an SPA, and should be speedily deleted unless someone can come up with evidence that this person has received signficant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources as required in WP:GNG. Coretheapple (talk) 23:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The article contained a copyright issue was grossly inaccurate, not stating that he was no longer a "comic book artist" and that he was currently working for Americorps as a paralegal and attending law school. I've rectified these issues, and it is now sourced principally to his own personal profile on his own website. Obviously that's impermissable, but I think it is necessary to do so while this AfD is running. Coretheapple (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep He received significant coverage in Christian Century. Though the political party is small and new, it is legally registered with the IRS, and claims thousands of members in all 50 U.S. states. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's the USA Today article I cited above, and as I pointed out it contradicts the claim that this person is a notable comic books artist, or even not a notable one, by giving him a different occupation ("corporate legal representative") than the one cited in this article ("artist"). It seems to me that in the six years that this article has been on Wikipedia, if there were reliable sources for the article's primary claims, they'd be there by now, especially since this is probably an autobiography. If this isn't an autobiography, then I would suggest that this may be a different Troy Boyle.Coretheapple (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not a case of different people with the same name. Boyle is mentioned in many books on atheism and comic book art that show up in a Google search, though text of those books is not available so I can't tell how substantive the coverage is. Primary sources unacceptable for establishing notability but presumably accurate, such as his profile on the political party website, make it clear that he is a comic book artist who also has an undergraduate degree in the legal field, and is now enrolled in law school. People can have more than one career, and the fact that one reliable source mentions one career does not undermine any claims about the other career. I admit that this is a close call and wish that we had more reliable source coverage readily visible online, but I do see evidence that offline sources exist. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Close call? You have to be kidding. What "many books"? Name a few. And this article is grossly inaccurate. See his self-written profile at [2]. He is a law student and "paralegal with 11 years of experience." He also says that he "was also a professional comic book artist," and that "Most of my work in comics was with pin-ups and cover art only." None of these facts are actually in the article, which is understandable given that it is probably an autobiography and undermines the basis of having this article. So the bottom line is that contrary to what it says in this article, he is a former comic book artist who now works as a paralegal and attends law school, and founded a so-called political party that seems to have garnered one article. There is clearly no basis for an article based on the past atheist affiliation. Can you please link to the multiple reliable secondary sources, independent of the subject, that substantiate this person's notability as a comic book artist? Coretheapple (talk) 06:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've tagged for disputed factual accuracy, and also for a close paraphrase issue. Coretheapple (talk) 06:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not a case of different people with the same name. Boyle is mentioned in many books on atheism and comic book art that show up in a Google search, though text of those books is not available so I can't tell how substantive the coverage is. Primary sources unacceptable for establishing notability but presumably accurate, such as his profile on the political party website, make it clear that he is a comic book artist who also has an undergraduate degree in the legal field, and is now enrolled in law school. People can have more than one career, and the fact that one reliable source mentions one career does not undermine any claims about the other career. I admit that this is a close call and wish that we had more reliable source coverage readily visible online, but I do see evidence that offline sources exist. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's the USA Today article I cited above, and as I pointed out it contradicts the claim that this person is a notable comic books artist, or even not a notable one, by giving him a different occupation ("corporate legal representative") than the one cited in this article ("artist"). It seems to me that in the six years that this article has been on Wikipedia, if there were reliable sources for the article's primary claims, they'd be there by now, especially since this is probably an autobiography. If this isn't an autobiography, then I would suggest that this may be a different Troy Boyle.Coretheapple (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the article as originally written claimed notability as a comic book artist does not mean that he could not later gain notability as an atheist political activist. It is likely that I would have agreed with deletion if the article had been nominated before publication of the USA Today/ Christian Century article. But we are discussing it after that publication. A Wikipedia biography can cover many verifiable aspects of a person's life, not just the accomplishment that makes them notable. So even if he is not notable specifically as a comic book artist, I see no reason why that can't be mentioned. I have already conceded that I see this as a borderline case, and see your recommendation to delete as perfectly reasonable although I am not quite persuaded. So, let's allow the debate to be played out, and see if any other reliable sources emerge. As for the "autobiography" issue, your suspicions are reasonable but unproven, and in any case, that is not a definitive reason to delete an article. Shortcomings in the current version of the article can be addressed through normal editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's some coverage from National Review Online that says "Boyle, who was apparently completing law school and writing a comic-book series while running the party, will now have more time to focus on his 'two careers of Law and Comics,' and a new job with the Department of Homeland Security." . As for books, 2008 Artist's & Graphic Designer's Market, The Slings & Arrows Comic Guide, and Kirby: King of Comics. As stated earlier, I can't see the text of the books but they clearly mention Boyle as a comic book artist. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Mentions don't matter. The references to his comic book work are clearly incidental and not "significant coverage" as required by WP:GNG, and the same is true of the article and blog post about the non-notable atheist group. Let's be clear that this is a former activist and comic book artist. He is a current paralegal and law student, now working as a Community Outreach Counselor for AmeriCorps.[3] It's important not to rely upon this inaccurate article for information on this person. Coretheapple (talk) 14:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:38, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- keep Notability is marginal but enough to require some entry, and the complications of his careers makes it impossible to simply redirect him to some article. As far as "former" comic book artist is concerned, I found him listed at Amazing Stories as the artist for a forthcoming book [4] so I don't see that we must say that he's not doing it anymore. Mangoe (talk) 13:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Cullen328 and Mangoe. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2013 (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.