Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Wayshak

Jonathan Wayshak

[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)

The article and a WP:BEFORE search turns up no WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary, reliable sources for this comic artist -- just WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS and WP:PRIMARYSOURCES. Thus the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO; the subject also meets no criterion of WP:NARTIST. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Comics and animation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing vandalism from blocked user Kellpb93ke (talk) 16:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per the deletion of Daniel Morcombe which did get undeleted. Kellpb93ke (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC) — Kellpb93ke (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

What has this got to do with Morcombe? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kellpb93ke What does Daniel Morcombe have to do with Jonathan Wayshak? Did you mean to comment on a different discussion? Unless this comment was posted mistakenly, there is no actual rationale offered to keep the article. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete Poorly referenced. --Altenmann >talk 17:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jonathan Wayshak is a primary subject in the MTV News, Juxtapoz, and Fangoria, and more cited in the article. He has illustrated posters for Beetlejuice, and comics for DC, Halo, etc. Hexatekin (talk) 04:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we looking at the same sources?
- The MTV source is a WP:INTERVIEW and as a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE cannot contribute to notability.
- The Juxtapoz source has a single WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Wayshak's name.
- Fangoria has a single paragraph discussing a poster Wayshak illustrated, most of it consisting of a quote from Wayshak.
None of these are WP:SIGCOV to qualify toward notability. And it's a complete red herring to say "he has illustrated posters...and comics." That doesn't establish notability at all. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per source analysis below. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230317204837/https://www.mtv.com/news/ae6ax8/sam-kieth-and-jonathan-wayshak-make-the-chickens-revolt-interview	Promotional site for MTV		interview	✘ No
https://gizmodo.com/indie-artist-interviews-new-york-comic-con-artist-alley-1849640204/4			interview	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240822030049/https://www.circusposterus.com/blog/juxtapoz-teases-us-with-their-annual-halloween-issue/			blog posting about Halloween issue of Juxtapoz. No mention of other publications	✘ No
https://www.thewrap.com/godzilla-x-kong-mondo-toys-poster-reveal/			passing metion of poster	✘ No
https://www.fangoria.com/mondo-beetlejuice-wayshak/			site selling poster	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20220527121739/https://hifructose.com/2015/08/24/inside-the-sketchbook-of-comic-artist-jonathan-wayshak/	?	?	multple images	? Unknown
https://web.archive.org/web/20240416070823/https://www.dc.com/comics/the-ferryman-2008/the-ferryman-1			promo listing for Ferryman #1	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240416081838/https://www.dc.com/comics/the-ferryman-2008/the-ferryman-2			promo listing for Ferryman #2	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20210224042407/https://www.darkhorse.com/Blog/2353/dark-horse-comics-deploys-justin-jordan-call-duty			promo listing for Call of Duty: Zombies #1	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240809132706/https://hifructose.com/2010/09/07/hi-fructose-collected-edition-vol-2/	?	?	Promo for Hi-Fructose Collected Edition Vol. 2	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240817205952/https://www.harvard.com/book/zerofriends_a_collection_of_art_passion_and_madness/			listing for Zerofriends at Harvard Booksotore	✘ No
https://www.thewrap.com/godzilla-x-kong-mondo-toys-poster-reveal/			A single WP:TRIVIALMENTION: "We are also super thrilled to debut a new timed edition poster by artist and illustrator Jonathan Wayshak, also for “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire.” The 24” by 36” screen-printed poster is a striking black-and-white tableau featuring Godzilla and Kong battling the movie’s villain the Skar King, a ferocious ape from deep within Hollow Earth. The poster will go for $80. See it below."	✘ No
https://www.shelfabuse.com/comic-book-reviews/toner-5-comic-book-review/		ShelfAbuse is self-published by Carl Doherty (see WP:SPS). (https://www.shelfabuse.com/about/)		✘ No
https://www.popculturemaven.com/comics/new-comic-book-reviews-week-of-12016/			Review of Devolution issue 1; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
https://theslingsandarrows.com/call-of-duty-zombies/			Review of Call of Duty: Zombies; not SIGCOV of subject. Review does not mention Wayshak's work.	✘ No
https://theslingsandarrows.com/devolution/			Review of Devolution issue 1; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
https://www.youdontreadcomics.com/comics/2021/7/28/the-scumbag-9-review			Review of The Scumbag issue 9; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

KEEP: Wayshak is well-known in the comic book/graphic novel world. I have added reviews from a number of sources within that world, which I would suggest indicates some notability. Guinness323 (talk) 06:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the sources to the assessment table above. They don't show WP:SIGCOV, except for sources that fail the test of independence or reliability. The closest they get is a claim of notability under WP:NARTIST, but that's only if you interpret a single comic book issue with two reviews as "a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." While the guideline does not describe comic books, it does generally exclude notability for individual works that are serial installments of a longer series (e.g. a TV show episode) and applying that principle to comic books would exclude this principle here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on sources added by Guinness323. BOZ (talk) 11:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the save goes to Guinness323. Not a field I excel in but if the artist is well-known within it then notability becomes evident. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article has improved with the new sources; was there really a WP:BEFORE? Tduk (talk) 16:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tduk, indeed there was. Read the source table. The sources added to the article do not support notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - based on the source analysis above and a BEFORE search. It is WP:TOOSOON for this artist, perhaps in a few more years there will be enough significant coverage in reliable sources that are fully independent of the subject to support an encyclopedia article. Being "well known" or having career success or "fame" is not the same as encyclopedic notability; this is not a reflection on the artist or their work, but simply a reality of WP's guidelines that have been crafted through consensus over a period of years. The article fails WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG at this time. Netherzone (talk) 02:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Source analysis appears to favor delete. The keep !voters need to remember that it is not a vote and would be advised to respond objectively and factually to source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per the source analysis, there aren't any reliable, independent sources with enough WP:SIGCOV to favour an article at the moment. I agree it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON, but for the time being, the article fails WP:ARTIST and WP:GNG. DesiMoore (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]