Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loserz (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Xoloz 18:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Loserz

A DRV consensus overturned the previous no consensus closure of an AfD on this article in light of rampant spamming. Please ignore the previous AfD. Per the DRV, this page will be semi-protected to help curb spamming. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 15:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per previous nomination. Alexa ranking over one million. JIP | Talk 18:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - easily fails WP:WEB. My Alt Account 19:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Article doesn't assert notability, so we have to hunt for it. Actual Alexa rank is 373,608, which is still not so great, and neither a Google search or a Google incoming links search looks much better. Seems like a nice comic, though. William Pietri 22:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep — This webcomic seems to be around for a while. Not much notability though. -- lucasbfr talk 23:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per William Pietri's research. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 04:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC) [reply]
  • Delete - I used to be a fan of this comic, although I haven't read it in over a year. I thought it was pretty good at the time, but it's not especially notable in comparison to other webcomics. --Cswrye 05:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, still does not meet our content policies as it is unverifiable through reputable third-party reliable sources and Wikipedia is still not an internet guide. No amount of longevity, alexa rank, or google hits will help us write an encyclopedia article (unless some reliable sources turn up in Google, of course). -- Dragonfiend 06:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Absolute no sign of notability or popularity. No external sources. I cannot believe the gulf that exists between websites and webcomics on Wikipedia. Pokemon-Safari.com, Alexa rank sub 10k deleted, Final Fantasy Shrine sub 10k deleted, Encyclopedia Dramatica 23k deleted. Yet we have to relist a nothing webcomic. - Hahnchen 22:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator. Semi-protecting AFDs is a great idea. RFerreira 05:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as previously mentioned. How can it be claimed that because I support the article being kept that it is spam?! Also previously mentioned that the alexa ranking that you're using is wrong. This is because an alternative URL was used, with the most commonly used one: http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?url=loserz.scribblekid.org being ranked 140,000. Nowhere near the 1,000,000. I also don't see why you should block those who want the page saving, so you can achieve your agenda. i.e. I protest strongly at your move to block the objectors so you can get what you want, it is absolutely against the spirit of wikipedia Fyver528 13:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi. As you can see on other website AFDs we generally let all and sundry participate unless they're egregiously ill-behaved. In this case, the previous AfD was too messy to call, so we've restricted this to established editors. [1] That seems regrettably necessary to me, as those commenters didn't seem to take time to understand how or why we make these decisions. Speaking of which, if you'd like to persuade people to change their votes, your best bet is to find reliable sources with verifiable information, hopefully showing that the site meets WP:WEB. For example, I see that The New York Times has had articles on Megatokyo and Get Your War On. As you search, you should keep in mind WP:NOR. Hope that helps, William Pietri 22:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Was a reasonably popular webcomic at one point. The fact that the artist updates much less frequently today (and that therefore the site is not visited as much) should not take from the notability that it had. When looking at alexa ranks, please note that loserzcomic.com is a relatively new url, & the comic has been accessible by multiple urls since it left keenspace.--Isocyanide 16:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Per my other reason (Yay! Revote!) --FlareNUKE 05:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emphatic Keep It's already been passed over for deletion once before, hell that was only a couple of months ago. It's been proven to be popular and noteworthy and deserves to remainon Wiki. Don't let some whiny attention whore troll get his way.--Foomartini 14:05, 15 September 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Loserz_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1138034521"