Talk:Jeremy Nell

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Comics: Creators Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Comics creators work group.

401 error

The trashmedia.co.za domain gives me a 401 error for all urls. 41.208.236.192 (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned up

Since this article has been deemed fit to stay on Wikipedia, I've cleaned it up, removing unverified claims, and adding more references. Crowlike (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section header

This article has had a couple of citations included, and seems to be balanced and accurate enough to warrant the removal of the tagged notice.

Crowlike 16:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was created by Jeremy Nell himself and he is the most frequent editor. He is still a rather obscure personality in South Africa. I don't think that he is well known enough to have an article about him on wikipedia, and if he hadn't created it itself, he would not have one. rrcatto (talk) 16:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this flagged for deletion? Simply because the user above made a wishy-washy claim with absolutely no supporting evidence other than anecdotal opinion? Even the line "I don't think..." is enough to reveal the absurdity. Jeremy is definitely a recognised cartoonist in South Africa. Crowlike (talk) 23:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear from a review of the contributions, that all the articles created by Crowlike were designed to promote Jeremy Nell and his interests. Please see: Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments. Quoted from there:

Notability is sometimes related to conflict of interest or self-promotion. Wikipedia should not contain any material that presents the appearance of being intended to in any way promote the personal notoriety of the author, or one of the close family members or associates of the author.

rrcatto (talk) 01:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasons are not good enough, you seem like you have an axe to grind, and your evidence for your claims is too weak. Any article about an individual could therefore be seen as being designed to promote his or her interests. Crowlike (talk) 07:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a follower of Jeremy Nell's Blog and can confirm that Richard Catto has a personal issue against him, please refrain from taking his point of view seriously. I don't think there should be an issue with Jeremy Nell being on WIKI. He is REALLY a cartoonist who is building up a credible career in both humour and political cartooning, that is published in national newspapers. Richard Catto is the proud owner of a blog that lists advertising as blog entries. Please disregard his tainted rantings.Redhed79 (talk) 08:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most biographies on WP are not autobiographies, something that WP advises strongly against. Redhead79, you are an outsider and therefore you ought to refrain from debating an article deletion. By outsider, I mean that you have made no contributions to WP. You are here to support your friend (Nell) and are doing that by making personal attacks against me (another thing which is not wanted on WP). rrcatto (talk) 12:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody is allowed to partake in this discussion. Your case against Nell is weak. Crowlike (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: WP:DP. Quoted from there:

It is considered inappropriate to ask people outside of Wikipedia to come to the discussion in order to sway its outcome.

I don't believe that Jeremy Nell can be considered a notable cartoonist until he has had a book of his cartoons published. He is still struggling to establish himself, and he is employing self promotion as a means to that end. This is a case of the tail trying to wag the dog. By that I mean that WP should be used to describe individuals who have already become known not used as mechanism to achieve fame. rrcatto (talk) 13:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's your belief, and that's all it is. A cartoonist, or writer, doesn't need to have a published book in order to be established and widely known. Nell is indeed established, as can be observed. Please prove that he isn't. Crowlike (talk) 14:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked for information published in reliable sources about Jeremy Nell but have not found any. This article is mostly original research with no cites to back up its claims. rrcatto (talk) 15:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you define as a "reliable" source doesn't matter, because Nell is indeed a recognised cartoonist in South Africa, as the numerous publications that his daily comics appear in, suggest (including one of South Africa's largest daily newspapers, The Times). You don't seem to have a balanced opinion, and as such, your seemingly anti-Nell bias needs to be visited. Crowlike (talk) 15:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any newspaper articles about Nell? Zapiro, for instance, is written about. Nell has not made the news in the mainstream media. rrcatto (talk) 16:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Wikipedia staff need to note the obvious underlying agenda that rrcatto has against Nell. Crowlike (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My agenda is transparent. I believe that a relatively obscure South African cartoonist is using WP to promote himself and his interests by creating articles which contain original research. I feel that it is impossible to remedy the problems and therefore the articles should be removed. Please also note the following:

"Please disclose whether you are an article's primary author or if you otherwise have a vested interest in the article." - WP:AFD

You have yet to disclose your interest in these articles. rrcatto (talk) 17:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yippee. It is now 2009 and he is indeed a notable Cartoonist being published a a wide variety of South African and international (not sure how wide that is) newspapers daily or weekly. End of discussion. AGrobler (talk) 10:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to the WP Admins for deciding that this article should be "kept" for it so warrants... And as vindication for their decision I would like to add this bit of evidence:

http://www.vodacom.com/news_article.php?articleID=1081&pid=press_releases

The National Award winners of the 2011 Vodacom Journalist of the Year Awards are:

Cartoonist

• Jeremy Nell, The New Age, Jeremy Nell Studio, Africa 2.0.

DavidPetros (talk) 41.240.245.51 (talk) 21:32, 8 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.240.245.51 (talk) [reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Jeremy Nell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the vandalism

I just found this tweet. Nell is encouraging people to vandalize his article. LefcentrerightDiscuss 15:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In their defence, he did offer a coffee mug and judging by their edits, they're not the brightest crayons in the box. gobonobo ⁺ ^c 15:52, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]