Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electric Retard (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. Feel free to redirect as an editorial decision post AFD if that is so desired. Cirt (talk) 03:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Electric Retard[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This website has not garnered enough coverage to pass Wikipedia:Notability (web). A Google News Archive search returns insufficient coverage in reliable sources. The first and fourth source are unrelated to this website. The second and third results are passing mentions.

Analaysis of the sources in the article

In the newest version, three sources are cited:
1. http://www.readplatform.com/electric-retard/ is a blog. The tone of the blog does not read like that of a reliable source. Here are the first two paragraphs of this source:

“

We’ve all seen interviews with nullos and videos of guys with shards of glass in their anus (I’m not going to bother linking that) – those things are fucking horrible but not really that creative, they’re just sex things. It’s the way God made those people, they’re just doing what comes naturally.

But what about when people just do stuff to wind people up? Stuff that’s just gratuitous, childish and willfully obnoxious. That’s where it’s not just your dick telling you what to do, it’s when you’ve got to think about the best way you can upset people with just your ‘being a dick’ skills alone.

”

A glance at the blog's homepage (http://www.readplatform.com/) confirms that the website is not reliable. Additionally, the author of the blog's list of other articles reveals the quote, "I'm a sham and my life is a shambles." and a link to http://completelyadorable.blogspot.com/. This does not indicate reliability.

2. http://www.homepagedaily.com/Pages/article4966-electric-retard.aspx is a student newspaper which is dubiously reliable. However the depth of this source is not sufficient to establish notability:

“

Possibly the most offensive comic strip in history.

The internet is responsible for pushing the limits of art and free speech. The web has allowed many frustrated comic artists, who could never have previously had their work published, to share with the world. This isn't always such a great thing, with some comics - such as Electric Retard - pushing every possible boundary of taste. We'll let artist Eric tell you the Electric Retard story in his own words... (a list of comic strips)

Why was it banned in Germany? Possibly for the very first strip, which began with this image: (image)

Yes, Electric Retard is evil and evilly funny if you can somehow get over any sense of morality or common decency. It's not all about Nazis - there's family killing, sadistic doctors, cannibalism and much, much more. Test your tolerance by clicking View button below, but be warned - you WILL be offended.

”

I largely agree with Emperor (talk · contribs)'s analysis of this source at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Readplatform and Homepagedaily (permalink) :

“

HPD might itself be deemed reliable and possibly notable but that piece on their site is really just a passing mention of the webcomic and is not an in-depth piece, you just wouldn't include such an article in a well-rounded and well-sourced article as it adds nothing. The fact that it is and is one of the few third party links is a cause for concern. The other articles are longer and more in-depth so could be of some use. It'd be worth checking out the writers to see if they have done things elsewhere which would help with the RS assessment.

”

3. http://wikibin.org/articles/electric-retard.html – Wikibin is not a reliable source.

These sources do not establish notability. When news organizations with a reputation of fact-checking write articles about this web comic / shock site, the article can be restored. Cunard (talk) 11:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the above analysis of the "sources". Besides, just plain doesn't pass WP:WEB. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - excellent research prior to nomination. This can not be sourced well enough because WP:GNG requires multiple sources. Bearian (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the multiple sources being "required" was just added to GNG and it states "generally required," not just "required."--Oakshade (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per excellent analysis of the so-called "sources". Reyk _YO! 02:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cunard's excellent analysis. Thorough as always. Tim Song (talk) 07:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Smerge to Muslim Massacre waiting for Eric 'Sigvatr' Vaughn to be created. There's some coverage of this comic, but reliable sources like heise.de only mention it in the context of other creations of Sigvatr, like his CSKO web site [1]. Other (shock) creations of this guy get more coverage, the MM game being the most notable one [2]. Pcap ping 01:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reasonable proposal and I support such a merge as long as the unreliable sources http://www.readplatform.com/electric-retard/ and http://wikibin.org/articles/electric-retard.html are not used. I have completed the merge of Electric Retard to Muslim Massacre: The Game of Modern Religious Genocide#Electric Retard using http://www.homepagedaily.com/Pages/article4966-electric-retard.aspx, the sole reliable source. Cunard (talk) 09:48, 19 February 2010 (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.