Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/[email protected]
- 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 00:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Advertisement. Does not look notable to me. Delete DMG413 02:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's a new web2.0 project involving webcomics. Could be the start of new ways publishing comics online. With the coming of new portable devices, particulary with pen, touch screen and wireless connection. This could be a great solutions for amateurs with devices unable to load painter, paint shop pro or other paintng applications. As each and every on of those devices will have a browser, they will be able to draw a comic strip directly online whenever the want. Seems very relevant to me as in a medium term timeline.keep it Tiago.Cardoso 02:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Crystal Ball. WP is not to promote start-ups that haven't done anything yet. Fan1967 02:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not a start-up. It was merly a project to test some technologies. Open Laszlo intereacting with Ruby On Rails. And instead of doing something meanless. I decided to create something nice, that could give some new contribute. It was done with good intentions, not to make money. And don't think that every web2.0 has to be from a startup. People do enjoy doing things their are paissoned about. keep it Tiago.Cardoso 03:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Call it a start-up or new project, doesn't matter. Neither does your passion or your intentions. It is not a judgement on the value of your project. The point is (a) you're new (b) basically nobody's ever heard of you. Wikipedia is not to promote unknowns, it is to document people or things that have already established notability. Fan1967 03:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I think you should go and check List of webcomics, every single webcomics there as a dedicated article and I can assure you that there are some webcomics there that aren't in the scope of "things that have already established notability.". Think of this as another webcomics on that list. But with an innovation added. Tiago.Cardoso 03:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The road to Hell is paved with...never mind. Delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian G. Crawford (talk • contribs)
hmmm, check Alexa ranking to Arbit_Choudhury and check Alexa ranking to [email protected]. It far to distante. And i'm about 800% better now then 1 month ago. It's growing. So, don't tell me Arbit_Choudhury has notability. Tiago.Cardoso
- Response Feel free to nominate Arbit_Choudhury for deletion. Still won't make your site notable. Fan1967 04:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just one last comment, I do think you are not being very open to this. I do think this project, this webcomics deserves a article here in WP. If you ask, i'll make an honest effourd to improve it with your help, but saying that you want to delete it because I'm not knowen it a bit far fetched!.. It gives a bad sense of anti-democracy to the project and the user-coorperation. What do you think, want to help me or just want to take privelige of being more senior users ? Tiago.Cardoso
- Delete as nn. -- King of Hearts talk 04:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 17:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]
- Delete This isn't comics, this is Oekaki. NN either way, though. Nifboy 01:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Nifboy. -- Dragonfiend 05:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Nifboy. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Nifboy. Tiago, instead of arguing about things that are irrelevant to this discussion, please acquaint yourself with WP:WEB, which is what we go by here. Even if the site were notable enough to have an article, this article would need a complete rewrite, as it is blatant advertisement. -- Zaron 21:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- PS- Zaron, you are right and some of your comments were the most accurate. I real do thing that the article isn't good as it is. I see some problems with it. My intention wasn't to make an AD, but I come like one.. Probably because I copy-paste some of the info in the site.. and that info is supposed to be not that impartial ;) I just didn't like the initial comments. Too much of pretentious and non-constructive comments. But that's just my opinion. I offered myself to re-write the article with help, like that link you shown. I'll take care of that later. This isn't that much of an important thing for now. Thanks anyway and sorry some more hard comments. :) Tiago.Cardoso
- 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.