Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dravecky (talk | contribs) at 19:59, 30 March 2008 (→Richard Tylman: weak delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Richard Tylman

Richard Tylman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails to demonstrate notability as a "poet, essayist and painter" per Misplaced Pages:Notability (people), creative professionals.

Poetry appears to be small-press and/or self-published. Essays were in a specialist free zine, Takie Zycie. Painting credentials are insufficiently demonstrated, citations largely coming from Richard Tylman's own website; he may well have had a career as an advertising artist, but verifiability and proof of notabilty in this field requires third-party sources about this work, not merely examples of its existence. There's a general lack of third-party verification of this article's content, no references in News or Books other than self-published, and there's also a strong conflict of interest (see WP:COIN#Richard Tylman). Gordonofcartoon (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 20:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. --Poeticbent talk 21:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - agree with nom in full this time. Have to add though that such press as Takie Zycie and many others will print almost any creation you submit there for free without neither checking its validity nor taking responsibility for views expressed in it. Some papers simply lack editors. Useless as a source. greg park avenue (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - concern Misplaced Pages may becoming too British/American and discounts Eastern European achievements. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm well aware of the need to avoid systemic bias. But this doesn't over-ride the need for proof that achievements are up to the generally-applied standards for notability. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 23:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment NN as artist, so notability seems to depend on the amount of "acclaim" his Koty marcowe Polish poetry collection received - two refs in Polish, so Polish-speakers must decide this one. Johnbod (talk) 04:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Since we tend to include much less notable djs, rockers and other artist wannabees, this one is a league above them. Has sources, has notability, I don't see the problem? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ty 02:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. Please, assume good faith. Magazines and newspapers with limited circulation are valid. Their circulation alone does not determine their notability. Thousands of articles in Misplaced Pages feature data drawn from brochures never again reprinted. Things like populations of cities, wartime events, lives of prominent politicians, geomorphology, molecular biology, architecture, turning points in history, advancements in technology, mass crimes, etc. No one is going to roam through articles about living artists in order to remove whatever information originated from small press. There’s no need to remove all mention of Polish language periodicals from this article under the threat of WP:COI. And please remain cautious about possible vendettas against immigrant periodicals by immigrants themselves, even though their opinions might have the appearance of objectivity. There are living people behind these publications, people with vested interest in their quality. In Vancouver where I live, the best local zines ARE free of charge: The Georgia Straight, The West Ender, The Courier. We do not need to single out Polish Takie Zycie weekly or even Strumień based on first impressions of Wikipedians not familiar with their content and role among ethnic communities. --Poeticbent talk 18:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

And please avoid poisoning the well. See WP:COI for advice on conduct in deletion discussions. Telling others to discount edits from editors with or without a particular background is not "exercising great caution". For the benefit of editors who are new to the situation, Poeticbent is Richard Tylman.

Note also that there is a difference between references that prove verifiability of statements (which can be as obscure as you like) and references that demonstrate notability (which are expected to be up to Misplaced Pages:Notability (people)#Creative professionals). Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Notability includes works widely published in non-trivial media and you can't get any more non-trivial than Time. The fact a number of cited sources are non-North American shouldn't be held against the article. Small press, similarly, doesn't disqualify an article, either, although in this case I actually ignored that part of the article because I stopped at Time Magazine. 23skidoo (talk) 21:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Working as an airbrush illustrator on advertisements used in Time certainly does not make you prima facie notable! Johnbod (talk) 21:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

People are also missing the point I made in the nomination: that verifiability and demonstration of notability require third-party articles about the subject's work. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. By revealing my real life name “for the benefit of editors who are new to the situation” User:Gordonofcartoon succumbs to the following argument from Misplaced Pages Poisoning the well: “Before you listen to my opponent, may I remind you that he has been in jail.” The nomination was relisted by User:Tyrenius in order to generate a more thorough discussion with less emphasis on conflict of interest, and more emphasis on notability, inspiring my comment above made six days after the initial nomination. My comment paints the necessary background to edits made in the interim by Gordonofcartoon. I do not believe that anybody’s missing the point he made in his nomination, that “verifiability and demonstration of notability require third-party articles about the subject's work.” All mention of third-party references “about the subject work” was removed from the article during discussion… so much for Gordonofcartoon’s impartiality. – What’s the point in discrediting a small Polish language art magazine, I ask? English language translation was already provided for you by a supporter of this nomination who speaks the language. In the translation (quickly challenged as “lacking in understanding of literary and editorial terminology”) we can read for example: “One of the most interesting poetic entries in recent years in émigré poetry”... “his national debut was a late debut by an already matured poet, both artistically and philosophically.” Meanwhile, even a short list of essays written in Polish was subsequently deleted from the article by Gordonofcartoon with the summary: “remove "essayist" - entirely in non-notable publications.” In my view, such unilateral removal of data following his own AfD nomination results in an interesting WP:COI for the nominator himself.--Poeticbent talk 19:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Weak delete Notability is poorly established and the article and its sourcing are strongly tainted by conflict of interest (WP:COIN#Richard Tylman). There is evidence that Tylman is a poet and an artist but that alone does not make him notable by WP standards. - Dravecky (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Biographical)
• AfD debates