Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnold (comic strip)

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold (comic strip)[edit]

This strip was created by a red link ~~hack~~ cartoonist and was distributed by two red link syndicates. Only 40 newspapers ever carried it. The source cited is no doubt reliable, but there's no indication of how much detail it allots for this particular strip. I could find no other sources that would assert notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 14:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 14:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep, I'm leaning slightly towards keeping it as appearing in forty newspapers for several years is a rather significant achievement for a comic strip. As for reviews or what have you of it, I'm sympathetic towards it on this point due to its age (pre-internet days) which could make it hard for use to find the sources for this so I won't be hasty in judging it to be delete. Mathmo ^Talk 15:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable enough to get mentioned in MAD ("The Trend Towards Rottenness in the Comic Strips", MAD #253, March 1985).SPNic (talk) 16:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Mad counts as a reliable source. :-P Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 16:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The fact the syndicates have redlinks only means that no one has bothered to write articles about them -- both syndicates are actually fairly well known within U.S. publishing. The fact the comic strip was syndicated across the country would confirm notability. Clearly the article requires enhancing, but not erasure. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. According to this interview "it was in fifty six papers at one time. LA Times was one of the big ones." --Dragonfiend (talk) 01:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A comic strip that ran in papers for several years. - jc37 15:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The fact that the author and syndicates are redlinks is a weird ad-hominem argument for deletion doesn't actually mean anything. (So what if things associated with the article are redlinks?) The breadth and length of its syndication is no mean feat, however. There are undoubtedly sources for this article, just perhaps not many on the internet currently. Ford MF (talk) 18:50, 14 November 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.