Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Wotch

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 of the debate was kept Clear consensus to keep Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 21:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Wotch

Non-notable and moderately popular webcomic. Jake013 22:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Also nominating articles Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson as unnecessary non-notable fancruft. Jake013 22:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep The Wotch is notable and popular enough to keep
• Keep and merge teh characters into this artilce. Seems moderately popular enough for inclusion--Nick Y. 22:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 22:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep I'm having a little trouble assuming good faith on this one. I do not believe this is a good faith nomination. The nominator has a history of questionable AfDs. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 23:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The articles for the two authors should be merged into The Wotch. . –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 18:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Pretty well known webcomic NawlinWiki 23:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Abe Dahiell. Silensor 23:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - the whole point of wikipedia, to my mind, is that it can have articles on things a regular encyclopedia couldn't. This is a reasonably good article on a fairly well known webcomic, and does not meet any of the criteria for being deleted as far as I can tell. I wouldn't object to a merge of the other two articles into the main Wotch article. --Tim 00:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: any webcomic that gets a spinoff and a video game is definitely notable. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson to The Wotch at the least. Could somebody who has suggested we keep The Wotch point to how this article meets WP:WEB? The only thing in the article that sounds close to an indicator of notability is "Multiple Members of the Wotch Forums ... are working on a Wotch Game Boy Advance video game." It doesn't sound like this game is from a major company, let alone even produced. -- Dragonfiend 14:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Get rid of the contentless character articles - I redirected them ages ago, but was reverted. Bleh. - Hahnchen 17:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson to The Wotch and weak delete per Dragonfiend. Chosen One 18:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge the minor articles, and no vote on the main article. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• KEEP it's non-notable to YOU.\/—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.255.245.46 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC).
• Keep. Nothing wrong with this. Factitious 23:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson to The Wotch and keep The Wotch. The comic has a significant following, is discussed on occasion by commentators to online webcomic review websites and blogs, and has spawned multiple spinoff and crossover comics. The separate entries add no information not present in the main entry (and in fact perpetuate a bit of error), but the webcomic itself is noted and notable. Redneckgaijin 01:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all useless articles. Includes The Wotch; as Dragonfriend says, the only indicator of notability is the video game, which is being produced by Wotch readers and not any major company. Maybe we should delete that too for non-notability? Don Diego^(Talk) 11:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The Wotch, Merge Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson to The Wotch, per Redneckgaijin. JQF 13:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, what you're going to delete all not-available-in-print webcomics or something? Merge Anne Onymous and Robin Ericson to The Wotch. GracieLizzie 17:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

• Just those that aren't notable. Don Diego^(Talk) 17:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

• keep of course its notable —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.154.112.220 (talk • contribs) .
• Keep this is one of the few webcomics that have enough fan support that the artist can live entirely on the comic-related income. With thrice-weekly color strips of 12 panels or more, it has one of the largest outputs of any webcomic. This deletion request makes no sense. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.225.182.25 (talk • contribs) .
• Delete useless unnotable fan articles. The only thing that makes it look notable is the loooooong list of main, minor, and less-than-minor characters, not to mention places, items, and other unimportant tiny bits of information. For goodness' sake, it's not even well written - seems it was mostly written only by fans or anons. And, as Dragonfiend says, the only thing that makes this article and/or webcomic look notable is the video game currently being prodced by "members of the Wotch forums." Some futile attempts to make a webcomic look nice and pretty, IMO. Sp@rkplug 21:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
  • This is a wiki. When you see an article that isn't as well written as you would like, you're allowed to fix that. Factitious 21:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge authors' articles and conditional keep - article is too long and too messy. Suggest more relevant information. Igor the Lion^(Roar!) 22:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I think the issue here isn't more relevant information so much as it is much, much less irrelevant information. }:-{D Redneckgaijin 22:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
    • (Forgot to write that down) And cut down on the irrelevant and less important aspects, such as the ridiculously long lists. Igor the Lion^(Roar!) 22:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep If you're going to merge the author's pages into the main page, then you might as well merge all authors' pages into the main pages of their works. You're talking about trying to unclutter the page and now merging the authors' entries with the main one would just clutter it up more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Robin47 (talk • contribs) .

• The reason some people want a merge is because there is so little content in the authors' pages. They're not worth their own pages, whereas many authors have a lot of information on their pages, so have them separately. --Tim 23:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't see any evidence that this meets the criteria of WP:WEB. The Google test isn't usable here; only a quarter of the hits for "wotch -wikipedia" are relevant to the webcomic, and "wotch webcomic -wikipedia" only nets a few dozen unique hits. If kept (which I'm certain it will be), merge all spinoff articles (the authors, characters, spinoff webcomic, and hypothetical video game) into the main article. -Sean Curtin 00:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Google testing isn't really that effective. Many an article of a notable person/place/thing has been deleted simply because he/she did not have enough Google hits. Don Diego^(Talk) 19:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strongest Keep Possible. As per other people keeping above. JONJONAUG 01:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep with a possible merge of connected articles. I think if a Wikiarticle is made, maintained and well kept, then it's notable for that. And for those of you saying it's just a fan article, what isn't on Wiki? Kirby Oak 05:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I say! Keep! Merge the articles if you want, but don't delete 'em. Wikipedia is meant to be a reference site. What if someone wants to learn about the Wotch and nothing is there? Besides, I worked hard to make this page, and I'd be crushed t osee it Gone. Hydragon 08:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and merge authors’ pages into the main article; although the latter does leave much to be desired, the subject looks relevant enough (cf. Alexa). —xyzzy_n 20:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep though merge authors to here. This webcomic has numerous references across wikipedia and deserves its place, such as all reasonably long lived webcomics Warmaster 22:15 28th May 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.