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 delete. Closed early per WP:SNOW. The article will be protected against recreation given the BLP concerns. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 00:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Garrison[edit]

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

No reliable source coverage whatsoever. AfDing instead of PRODding because I'm hoping for a speedy SNOW close on this. Brustopher (talk) 22:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Improve sources and keep. Examples: The Nib, Online Hate Prevention Institute (Australia) (includes fair use image), Radix, Vice News '''tAD''' (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Nib is a a blog on medium, radix is a journal run by white supremacists and the OHPI source is written by Garrison about himself. That only leaves the VICE source. Still not notable. Brustopher (talk) 22:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The OHPI find his story to be a relevant to their cause from the other side of the world '''tAD''' (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I looked for sources in the past and didn't find much. The OHPI has discussed Garrison's cartoons prior to the primary source mentioned above (summary, Scribd link). The report shows his cartoons and several examples of how they are defaced, but the report is more about social media and the role of memes and cartoons in antisemitism than it is about him as an artist. I believe The Nib is edited by Matt Bors who is an established cartoon journalist/editor, but it's still not really solid as a source for meeting WP:BIO. Grayfell (talk) 01:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt - fails WP:BIO - again. ukexpat (talk) 12:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt, clearly does not meet the WP:GNG, page is also a magnet for trolling and defamation. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Delete and Salt Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails general notability guidelines, WP:NAUTHOR. Article has been recreated after being deleted as an Attack page and serious BLP violations are continuing per [1] Jbh ^Talk 13:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:BIO. Given the nature of the subject and the abysmal sourcing used currently, there may be an appropriate CSD, but a WP:SNOW delete and salt is probably most straightforward. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete So he's a cartoonist and was trolled, doesn't make him notable. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Given the various BLP concerns, it's probably worth noting that the article creator has another copy of this in his/her sandbox: User:Rossbawse/sandbox. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:55, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt Subject severely fails WP:BIO. Given the above commentary I also support a WP:SNOW close. No need to drag this out. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:42, 4 September 2015 (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.