Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life of Wily
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Grandmasterka 07:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This webcomic is long finished so it's not exactly link spam like many others on Wikipedia, but it's still entirely non notable. It claims to be one of the big sprite comics, but only manages to come up with 80 Google links. There is a mention of its popularity found on the 8-bit theater website, here. But I don't think being one of the top sprite comics on BigPanda topsite for some period of time really amounts to something worth keeping. It's not like it was around in the early days of the internet or anything either, it ran from 2001 to 2004. - Hahnchen 00:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Google shows nearly 8000 hits for "Life of Wily". Considering this is a title, this is a far better standard to judge google links by than the uncapitalized form of the search. Not only that, but Brian Clevinger wrote [an essay] on Webcomics which specifically mentions Life of Wily alongside his own comic and Bob & George. There's far less notable comics with Stubs than Life of Wily. Lankybugger 01:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I've linked the essay that mentions life of wily in the nomination anyway. And I've also linked the Google search I performed. I have no idea how you came up with 8000 hits for "Life of Wily" when Google ignores capitalisation. - Hahnchen 02:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Try this Google search: 7,550 hits. --Metropolitan90 06:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I really don't see what I'm doing wrong, I actually checked Google.com as well, as they sometimes give different outcomes, but for both I get a similar number of hits (80 unique links). - Hahnchen 14:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Try this Google search: 7,550 hits. --Metropolitan90 06:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment your figure of unique links is about right. there are plenty of Ghits pointing to buzzcomix, newbsoft and thefreedictionary included in the 8000 Ghits. Strip these out, along with the wiki mirrors and you are left with about 80. Ohconfucius 03:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I've linked the essay that mentions life of wily in the nomination anyway. And I've also linked the Google search I performed. I have no idea how you came up with 8000 hits for "Life of Wily" when Google ignores capitalisation. - Hahnchen 02:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, unverifiable through reliable sources, wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information (articles on works of fiction and web sites should describe their topics' historical significance). -- Dragonfiend 06:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep per Lankybugger. As for the Google search, searching on google.co.uk gives only 80 hits. Searching on google.com gives around 8,000, and the site is still rather extensively linked for a webcomic. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 07:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, I agree that being one of the top sprite comics on BigPanda topsite for some period of time doesn't really amounts to anythingm but that in combination with the 8 bit theater mention and the Googlehits mentioned by the other editors is enough for a webcomic IMO. - Mgm|(talk) 11:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ironic delete - but weak - I'm not impressed by the quality of any sources. Alternatively, rewrite the article to be about me ;) WilyD 12:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Regardless of Google, as Dragonfiend said, without reliable sources or web awards, this comic did not satify WP:WEB or WP:V.-- danntm T C 02:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Wily. Defunct comic which scores 7280Ghits, of which 86 unique. The artist is known, though, and It did apparently last 3 years, but seems to be problem with WP:V. Ohconfucius 03:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete, on the line, but looks too WP:V, and probably not entirely notable either.-Kmaguir1 08:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per Kmaguir1 Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 04:45, 1 September 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.