Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acid Reflux

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Acid Reflux

None notable webcomic, which can be found here along with its deforested forums here. Alexa turns out nothing for this webcomic, and Google search only gives links to Acid Reflux disease (?). Further searches still did nothing to show how acid reflux stands out from the masses of websites out there. - Hahnchen 01:50, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Its forums are a ghosttown and it doesn't show on Alexa because it has been defunct for years. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 02:00, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I have tried to nominate only currently running webcomics for the alexa rank to be of benefit. I nominated this one because there was a large update summer this year with 10 extra strips added on. Had the webcomic been notable, there should have been a spike of activity, whereas there was none. - Hahnchen 02:45, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Bearing in mind that I voted delete because I don't think it was notable even when it was updating, I don't think noting the lack of interest in a small update after nearly three years of no updates is evidence of a lack of notability. Whether or not it's notable is based on how popular and significant it was when it was still updating, not how many people check the site now that it's long defunct. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 02:51, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
    • 10 comics? Unannounced? After three years of no activity? Not a member of any large portal or group? --Kizor 18:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure what I was thinking. Keep this, as it was very popular when it was still around, and a major part of Bigpanda back when Bigpanda was still around. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. as per nom. DirectorStratton 02:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unverified, no evidence of significance. Friday (talk) 03:11, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or add more cowbell as per above --Phroziac^(talk) 06:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment if deleted, recreate as redirect to Gastroesophageal reflux disease —Wahoofive (talk) 06:34, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Gastroesophageal reflux disease, if this ever becomes notable it should still not use this title. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:35, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Gastroesophageal reflux disease, where Acid reflux already redirects. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 07:13, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect Jwissick^(t)(c) 07:40, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as above. --Ezeu 21:34, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, it was a pretty popular webcomic back in the day. Searching on Google for:"acid reflux" comic OR "web comic" OR webcomic gives me about 50,000 results, though that still has some results for Acid reflux. If anyone remembers Bigpanda.net, Acid Reflux was usually listed in the Top Comics list. At the very least, it should be transwikied to comixpedia. --Matteh (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep! Utterly faulty premise. As A Man In Black says, Alexa is an extremely poor indicator of a defunct website's notability. The web comic was popular and prominent at the definitive web comic portal of its time. The number of strips and the amount of active time both pass the WikiProject Webcomics guidelines with flying colors. --Kizor 18:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Sufficiently notable as per the Webcomic guidelines -Abe Dashiell 12:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Please, please stop relying on Alexa. People keep explaining why it's unreliable. You know that it's unreliable. Yet you keep mentioning it in otherwise groundless afd listings. In any case, Acid Reflux is a historically prominent webcomic that easily meets WP:COMIC. The fact that it's old is irrelevant — we wouldn't delete an article about a book just because it had been published several years ago, would we? Factitious 05:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. nn. Dragonfiend 06:38, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Since I'm being obnoxious, why nn? What's missing from the arguments for keeping above? Honest question. --Kizor 09:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.