Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 March 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Indiana Fats (talk | contribs) at 01:14, 29 March 2006 (+Seaterra). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< March 28 >

Purge server cache

March 29

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 of the debate was speedy G7 by User:Starblind. Royboycrashfan 01:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Schmidt

I originally {{prod}}ded this page, but the creator objected without reason. Google search for "Christian Schmidt" "Molecular Cancer" brings up 46 unique hits; when searching for one alone, the results given make it difficult to justify a conclusion. Implies notability, though I doubt many people have heard of him. I have to say delete. Royboycrashfan 00:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What justification do you need in order to change your mind ? In other words, how 'well known' should a person be in order to be included in Wikipedia?--Schmidt102 01:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, extensive publication record, journal editor, signficant Google Scholar presence. Notable subject, neutrally written article. Content is more important than authorship, and vanity alone isn't grounds for deletion. Monicasdude 01:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I looked it up and agree with you. Go ahead and delete the page as soon as possible. --Schmidt102 01:27, 29 March 2006 (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.
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 of the debate was DELETE. I think it's fair to close this as "delete", as there are considerably more delete votes than keep votes, and most of the keep votes are from users with very few contributions. JIP | Talk 07:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elijah and Azuu

  ATTENTION!

If you came to this page because a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum asking you to do so, please note that this is not a vote on whether or not this article is to be deleted. It is not true that everyone who shows up to a deletion discussion gets an automatic vote just for showing up.

The deletion process is designed to determine the consensus of opinion of Wikipedia editors; for this reason comments from users whose histories do not show experience with or contributions to Wikipedia are traditionally given less weight and may be discounted entirely.

You are not barred from participating in the discussion, no matter how new you may be, and we welcome reasoned opinions and rational discussion based upon our policies and guidelines. However, ballot stuffing is pointless. There is no ballot to stuff. This is not a vote, and decisions are not made upon weight of numbers alone. Please review Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more information.

A webcomic hosted on DrunkDuck, a free webcomic host which is described in its own article as "a small community", it has an Alexa rank over 100,000. And note, that this webcomic is just one of many on that 100,000+ ranked site. Is this comic notable? A look on Google for "Elijah and Azuu" brings up 125 hits, and looking through the first 70 or so links, not a single one of them was a review or critical commentary from a semi-respected source. - Hahnchen 01:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 01:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]
  • Delete, another non-notable webcomic. Royboycrashfan 01:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. as above RobLinwood 02:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As two above Leidiot 02:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RoyBoy ConDemTalk 03:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, non-notable webcomic --TBC??? ??? ??? 06:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nn webcomic. --Terence Ong 10:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete definitely non-notable. --Jay(Reply) 23:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non notable --Ugur Basak 23:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Am I reading the Google hits thing wrong? Because the description above says it only has 125 hits, but when I click it I see 1,540.
    • For some reason, when I click on it now, the amount of links is reduced to under 80. I'm counting the amount of "unique hits", you can find out the unique hits by clicking through the google pages until the end. The reason I count unique hits only is because for webcomics, literally thousands of hits are all from one site like buzzcomic. And I had a look at your additions to the article too, they're pretty informative additions too, but I just don't think that singular drunkduck comics do not have that large a following. - Hahnchen 15:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dunno, is it really fair to judge a comics viability based on its choice of hosting service? I really think that the comic should be looked at as a seperate entity from Drunk Duck.
  • Do Not Delete: I definitely believe that this comic falls under the "noteable" category, as it is the top-read comic on DrunkDuck, and it was nominated for several prestigious awards at BuzzComix, but has since opted not to compete for awards. This does not change the fact that it was obviously of a high enough quality that it was nominated in the first place. Experimentmonty
  • Do Not Delete. I second the above reasoning.
  • Keep High quality, several award nominations and a large fanbase. Seems with articles about obscure pkanets in star wars books have articles this deservs to stay--Seth Turner 05:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As above --85.12.80.1 07:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep 1,620 hits on Google. The wiki page is second.
  • Do Not Delete. This comic has been around for a while, and was once in the top 10 on webcomicslist.com (which is now defunct).
  • Delete - 1,620 hits is not notable by my standards -sorry. --Khoikhoi 19:18, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep E&A is the webcomic that got me hooked on webcomics. I have yet to see another that can really compare. The hosting's only part in the comics standings is that because the hosting was crap for so long, the comic lost a fair bit of its following. We're coming back, but you can't judge its validity or lack thereof so soon after such a major crash. This comic has been around for years, is well produced, is near a thousand strips, and has a major loyal following. If webcomics list were up I have no doubt it would be in the top ten. This sounds like a cornerstone of the webcomic industry to me, not a negligible side note. Do not delete this, please.
  • Delete, arguments for notability not convincing. Sandstein 19:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do guest comics done by the author have any impact on notoriety? Because there have been at least guest comics for RPG World and Alien Loves Predator
  • Delete, does not appear to meet WP:WEB. -- Dragonfiend 01:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete You ever seen a drunk duck? Sorry sight. T K E 04:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now now, there's no need to attack Drunk Duck; I've seen a lot of very quality work come from there. They provide a helpful service and don't ask for anything in return. Anyway, although E&A is an important comic to me, I have to admit that it does not meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion.
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.
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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 01:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seaterra

Looks like an advertisement Indiana Fats 01:12, 29 March 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_29&oldid=45938603"