Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cigarro & Cerveja (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. Stifle (talk) 18:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cigarro & Cerveja

Non notable comic. The previous AfD discussion focused on the wrong point. This isa comic strip which also appears on the web, not the other way around. But the comic only appears in a college newspaper and has not received any independent attention from reliablke sources. Searching for the tile plus Esteves (the name of the author, which you would expect to appear in any serious discussion of the comic) gives only 53 distinct Google hits[1], which is rather poor for a comic which runs for ten years. The two books with comic strips appear to be self published. Fram (talk) 13:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Regarding its being "a comic strip which also appears on the web, not the other way around", I think you're mistaken there. It started as a print comic strip as a college newspaper, but is now primarily, if not exclusively, a webcomic -- it does not, in fact, seem to still appear in the Gateway newspaper at all[2], and most if not all of its Google hits are references to its web incarnation, not the original newspaper version. (There is some confusion in the article where it says that the strip "continues to be published weekly on its web site"; the way the sentence is worded "its" could be taken to refer to the Gateway newspaper, but on examination it seems clear that despite the awkward wording it's supposed to refer to the website of the strip, not of the newspaper.) All that being said, however, I'm afraid I'm still going to have to vote...
Delete. I've been a reader of this strip for a while (though I haven't kept up with it lately), even own one of the books, but I can't really justify keeping this article in Wikipedia. You're correct that the books are self-published, and the fact that it once appeared in a college newspaper certainly doesn't establish notability. I went searching for any references that would satisfy WP:WEB, and the closest thing I could find was a mention on the strip's Comixpedia page[3] that it got an honourable mention in the "2007 Joe Shuster Awards for the Outstanding Canadian Web Comic Creator". But I did some digging and even that doesn't hold up; the Joe Shuster Award does exist and seems reasonably well known, but when I went to its site to check on the matter I gather that all an "honourable mention" means is that the strip was nominated for the award[4], which still doesn't strike me as enough to establish notability. (If it had won the award, of course, that would be another matter.) I like the strip; I'd really like to be able to vote KEEP on it; but I just can't justify it under existing guidelines. If anyone is able to find any reliable sources or significant awards the strip won that I missed, I will be happy to change my vote. --Smeazel (talk) 22:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Okay, sorry to get so long-winded here and monopolize this page, but one more thing I wanted to add. Looking over the previous AfD, I see that it was closed with a "Keep" vote because the fact that the strip once appeared in a college newspaper was taken to satisfy WP:WEB, criterion #3. I get that that's why you wanted to try to claim that it was a print newspaper that also appeared on the web rather than the other way around -- to avoid that argument being used again -- but I still think that claim is erroneous. However, I think the original argument that publication in a college newspaper qualifies as a "respected and independent" source doesn't hold water anyway. Typical college newspapers accept pretty much any comics that are submitted to them--and I speak from experience here. Heck, if having once appeared in a college newspaper is enough to satisfy WP:WEB, I have my own webcomic I could write a Wikipedia article about! (Well, no I couldn't, because of course it would violate WP:COI, but the point is that getting a strip into a college newspaper is way too easy to make it qualify as reasonable grounds for satisfying WP:WEB. WP:WEB specifies that the web content has to be distributed through a "respected and independent" source; nowhere does it say that just any print source automatically qualifies as "respected and independent".) Okay, I know I may seem to be arguing against the decision made in the first AfD here, and I'm not sure that's really helping your case, but I figured it was germane to the matter at hand. --Smeazel (talk) 22:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 04:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing at all here from reputable third-party sources. --Dragonfiend (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2008 (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.