Talk:Howard David Johnson
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editAre allposters.co.uk and amazon.co.uk really 'affiliated' or are those links sufficent to remove the notice now?
advertising
editSorry guys, I read the history but the article still looked like it was lifted from a brochure with loads of bias, weasel words & referring to his own opinion on his website. Not much in the way of 3rd party notability. After making it more encyclopedic, will later look at ghits & see how notable he is. Manytexts (talk) 00:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Movement
editJohnson's work is in no way aligned with the modern art movement Realism. He claims his style is "photorealistic" which is okay because that doesn't associate the social critique necessary for 19th century realists. In general it appears to be "science fiction / fantasy" or a heavily romanticised veneration for a mythologised, fantasised and anachronistic past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.114.164.71 (talk) 22:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Before 2020s or mid-to-late 2010s he didn't do science fiction & fantasy (other than long-existent historical folklore/legends/mythology can be considered fantasy). No modern realists were alive in 1800s and doing realism doesn't mean one needs be part of a 'movement'--dchmelik (t|c) 05:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Questionable Entry
editMost of his "artworks" are just shoddy photomanipulations which commit multiple accounts of copyright infringement. This whole wikipedia entry seems like an attempt to feign credibility and advertise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.153.240.122
- Not really: he's been doing traditional art several/many decades and only in recent years got into digital--which I wouldn't call shoddy nor plagiarism (though some may allude/reference historical art so old already public domain so isn't plagiarism to manipulate which I haven't even seen any case of him doing).--dchmelik (t|c) 05:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Career
editThis section lists several high profile clients, none of which are sourced. The source links to a deleted profile on directoryofillustration.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludens123 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)