Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of furry comics

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 keep. Renaming is a possibility that can be discussed on the talkpage. Tone 09:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of furry comics

[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)

Wikipedia is not the place for a simple list of comics that only interest a certain audience. Such listings would be better served in a category. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 02:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 02:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:46, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As I understand it, having a related category is not an argument against having a list. What WP:LISTN does state is: "Notability of lists ... is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources ...; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I am trying to find whether furry comics have been discussed as a group or set in reliable independent sources. "Funny animal" comics (or comics featuring anthropomorphic characters) certainly have - not surprisingly, as they have been around for over 100 years. I haven't yet found any RS discussing "furry comics" as a group, so they may not meet WP:LISTN. I'll do some more searching. RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As RebeccaGreen said that is not a valid reason to delete an article. It should be renamed to List of anthropomorphic comics. List of anthropomorphic animal superheroes redirects to List of animal superheroes, and Anthropomorphic character (comics) redirects to funny animal. I have no idea why "funny animal" is a thing, I don't see any reliable sources calling anthropomorphic animals in comics by that term. Dream Focus 02:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- "Funny animal" is a common term for comics about anthropomorphic animals like Pogo Possum and Donald Duck. It's been in usage among historians and academics since the sixties. Here are some examples Argento Surfer (talk) 13:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Three pages of Google results for that, although I click on some and don't see it in the links. "Anthropomorphic comics" gets three pages of results as well and is a more logical title since "funny animals" are not always funny at all, some not trying to be humorous even. Dream Focus 13:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - A misnomer used to describe comic books, you say? Balderdash! Argento Surfer (talk) 15:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename. I have no preference on what the new title should be. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:01, 29 July 2019 (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.