Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Poe (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 05:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Poe[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Created a bunch of webcomics that don't have their own articles. Won an award which many other AFDs have deemed insufficient. Sources are primary, unreliable, or tangential. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:34, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Webcomics, and Ohio. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:34, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The first citation is from the Intelligencer Journal, which appears a reliable source, but the citation in this article is broken. I would be keen to see if this article can be found. Between this and the CBR coverage, it is possible that this subject has multiple independent substantial pieces of coverage. However, I can't find the Intelligencer Journal article. HenryCrun15 (talk) 08:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly can't find the Lancaster Online article through the Wayback Machine and Webcite isn't currently working for me. It likely wasn't archived anywhere. I think that per WP:SOURCEACCESS, it still "counts"(?), but that's a weird situation of course. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 17:59, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral – There are few sources to work with. The CBR and ComixTalk reviews are great, and I found Poe's name listed in this weird Bleeding Cool article. The WCCA win brought me over to neutral. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 17:59, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. Setting aside Web Cartoonists awards status, which I still think are not terrible (but I acknowledge a number of others have dismissed), he didn't win them, his works did. It's a small difference, but WP:INHERITED suggests its important. As I don't see much coverage of him (I think CBR coverage is borderline SIGCOV and also not far from a press release), I am forced to agree he probably doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:29, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete per nom and Piotrus. Ref 1 can't be opened, ref 2 says is a press release and is barely SIGCOV, plus CBR is marginally reliable to me, either way, it's difficult for that to meet GNG. Ref 3 is a blog, so isn't an RS. The final ref is a is an award, with a borderline notable article (that survived 4 AfDs) citing (mostly trivial, but just with barely notable) mentions, I'm not sure if it's notable for Poe's webcomic, but note this AfD is on Poe, not the webcomic. As notability isn't inherited, and the award doesn't count towards significant coverage for the webcomic creator. Ref 2 and 4 probably has some good info (but aren't significant), but there isn't any related topics to merge to, so I support deletion. VickKiang (talk) 01:06, 21 July 2022 (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.