Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Buckley (artist)

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 redirect and merge (if possible) with Ctrl+Alt+Del. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 13:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Buckley (artist)

Tim Buckley (artist) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Though Buckley has public exposure, this page really doesn't say anything that should not appear on Ctrl+Alt+Del. So delete based on notability. DaoKaioshin 03:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. He wrote a couple of legitamate books. Perhaps you nominated per WP:HOLE? BuickCenturyDriver 03:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Well my point is that the scope of Tim's notability does not extend past Ctrl+Alt+Del, these books included. W.marsh's redirect suggestion is probably the best idea for this page.DaoKaioshin 03:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. While Connecticon is crap, I did meet him at it. Definitely notable. Nardman1 03:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• This article gets a lot of WP:LIVING violations, while apparently lots of people dislike this guy, reliable sources don't exist (or at least, never end up getting cited) to back up any of this criticism. This has led to the article being redirected to Ctrl+Alt+Del in the past, on the basis that there isn't enough information on this guy from "acceptable" sources to ever write a complete article. I would support going back to that redirect, as clearly people are looking for information on this guy. --W.marsh 03:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Totally fails WP:N , WP:RS, and WP:V. Inkpaduta 03:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep.per BuickCenturyDriver. Mathmo ^Talk 05:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Merge With Ctrl+Alt+Del. mrholybrain's talk 12:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, as per BuickCenturyDriver. Lankiveil 12:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
• Redirect to Ctrl+Alt+Del. While Tim Buckley is one of the most notable webcomic artists, his fame is directly centered around his comic. He's almost unknown outside of webcomics, which means he doesn't really qualify for an article by himself. He's also the target of a lot of hostility. Any article regarding him is going to have a lot of hate directed at it, and per the guidelines on living persons, we should avoid criticisms unless they can be extensively sourced. Most of this stuff isn't even sourced at all. Cheers, Lankybugger 14:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect to Ctrl+Alt+Del Nothing on Buckley's page is memorable that isn't about his comic. This page is just a cesspit for WP:LIVING vios.130.126.130.171 16:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep for the same reasons that Brian Clevinger has his own article. Both are very popular webcomics with similar fanbases and both have appeared numerous times at fan conventions to general acclaim. As Brian often says, they're both decently popular "interweb celebrities," and should be kept as such. Just because information here is mentioned on another site doesn't mean that an encyclopedia shouldn't include information on him as well. RPH 22:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect as per W.marsh and Lankybugger. Because the WP:LIVING violations are frequent and egregious, I recommend locking the redirect down. My second choice would be to delete. It definitely should not be kept in its current form. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 12:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect to Ctrl+Alt+Del. SlideAndSlip 22:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect: notable webcomic (yes, they exist), but artist not notable outside of the comic, and not enough verifiable, interesting info to warrant own article. Fram 09:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. There is no reason to delete what has the potential to be a very good article. Scorp Stanton

Comment Currently, there's nothing in the article which can't be moved to the article on Ctrl+Alt+Del. It only mentions him in the context of the comic itself, or in direct relation to the website hosting the comic (IE Charities he promoted on the site, merchandise he sells related to the site, etc). There's nothing asserting Tim Buckley's notability outside of CTRL+ALT+DEL, which already has an extensive article. Cheers, Lankybugger 14:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

reply if we moved every article that didn't have much content at one point or another, we wouldn't have any of wikipedia's featured articles. This "what's the harm of a redirect" attitude is really not helpful. This person is distinct from the comic he writes/draws and has done things unrelated to CAD. Senseless redirects are a bad idea. Delete the article if it's innappropriate(which I doubt), but don't redirect unless there's honestly a reason to expect one(namely misspellings, synonyms, and non-notable spinoffs. i kan reed 19:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

rebuttal This is indeed the point of contention, whether Buckley has notable contributions outside his comic. Earlier, Buckley was compared to Brian Clevinger. The difference between them is that Clevinger does have other ventures dealing with separate IP and collaborations involving individuals who do have some measure of notability in their respective industries. Even this article, as it is, reflects Buckley's current lack of non-encyclopedic accomplishments, couching everything in terms of its relation to his comic. And, if we're willing to count there are exactly zero (0) lines in this article that do not mention Ctrl+Alt+Del DaoKaioshin 22:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply again My point was on the notion of theory not on present article state. A person is not the same as a webcomic, and really shouldn't be redirected as such. Redirects discourage actaully making an article out of something. His entry into the "hottest gamer" or whatever it was that was an international competition is a unique aspect that could be ascribed to him without being more than tangentially related to CAD. And while this information is not presently in the article, it could be and a redirect would discourage that and similar information from ever being added to wikipedia, thus is contrary to the fundemental mission of wikipedia, and I strongly oppose any redirect, and would stand for a delete over a redirect. i kan reed 05:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep or possibly merge and redirect to Ctrl+Alt+Del until such time better sources are available. RFerreira 07:57, 16 February 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.