Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur, King of Time and Space
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. Proto::type 11:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article makes no claims to notability for this comic. Searching for "Arthur, King of Time and Space" -wikipedia results in 591 results further suggesting a lack of notability. Furthermore, it hasn't been published nor has it recieved any awards. Delete as it fails WP:WEB.
- Comment "Arthur, King of Time and Space" -site:wikipedia.org -site:answers.com is more useful, as it reduces the number of false negatives from sites that mention wikipedia and the article on the same page. It wouldn't make sense to penalize an entry because people talking about it were citing us, do you think? Performing the search as mentioned does not significantly enhance the evidence for notability. (680 results, though it is the number one result for the title even without quotation marks, and seems to have a google pagrank of 5 of 10, alexa rank of 845,539.) 68.250.175.194 21:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brad Beattie (talk) 09:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. MER-C 09:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. yandman 13:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For what it is worth, this is a long-running web-comic (hence, technically, "published", just not on paper), by one of the respected lights in UK Dr Who fandom, which is widely referenced by other fansites and comic sites. It may not be Doonesbury, but it isn't something invented during the recess, nor is it, as was the Cat License, "written in crayon". After all that, I'd like to register a formal Keep, for substance, not for sentiment. -- Simon Cursitor 14:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. As far as I can see, this comic is about 2 1/2 years old. So it's age wouldn't really make the comic notable considering some have been around for closer to 10. --Brad Beattie (talk) 15:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The term long-running in the original poster's comment probably refers to the comic having 903 consecutive daily updates since it's appearance online by it's current name. This would be equivalent to a run of 5 and 3/4ths years for a Monday/Wednesday/Friday comic, a mark few non-notable comics reach. The regularity and reliability of his updates is very unusual amongst webcomics artists; Gadzikowski is a surviving participant in the Daily Grind Iron Man Challenge which has run more than a year and a half at this point. Gadzikowski is likely to continue this run indefinitely - he seems to have been cartooning daily since 1976 (yes, hard to verify) and has stated that: I intend to tell the story of King Arthur in real time in daily panel gags over twenty-five years... In light of his current productivity this seems probable. (Reference: http://www.arthurkingoftimeandspace.com/cast.htm, scroll to the bottom.) 68.250.175.194 21:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. As far as I can see, this comic is about 2 1/2 years old. So it's age wouldn't really make the comic notable considering some have been around for closer to 10. --Brad Beattie (talk) 15:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This article is also referenced in List of webcomics, and Gadzikowski is briefly mentioned as a presenter in Web Cartoonist's Choice Awards.
- Weak Delete-Article seems to be informative. But someone should provide references and source to verify the notability. If they can do so I shall change my vote to keep.
Nileena joseph (Talk|Contribs) 15:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Simon's points lead me to think the author is notable by being cited in the fan community. This means the comic satisfies WP:WEB. Xuanwu 07:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable webcomic. Maybe notable to its fans, definitely not notable in general. WillyWonty 23:09, 13 November 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.