Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circles (comic book)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Circles (comic book)
- – (View log)
Another furry comic. There is no assertion of notability, and it is totally unsourced and seems to be nearly totally OR, and this comic only has had 6 issues, not making it particularly long-running. Delete per WP:ATT and WP:N K@ngiemeep! 05:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete This article has been on my radar for some time. In addition to the article format, it does in fact appear to be a non-notable comic only published by a genre vanity press. I'm not throughly familiar with the genre though so if some realiable sources emerge from other editors that can verify notability I could be swayed. Since it is printed material and I'm always more inclined to give printed media a little more slack. NeoFreak 12:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. I've heard of it but that is no reason to keep it, and it makes no assertion of WP:N. Some reliable secondary sources on the subject could change my vote as well, printed material tends to get a little leeway per NeoFreak but it needs to satisfy criteria. Arkyan • (talk) 15:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Reluctant delete given the effort that's gone into it, but nothing to indicate notability. And why do we have so many furry articles, anyway? - Iridescenti (talk to me!) 17:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Probably due to the large internet presence. It's pretty undeniable that, being an online encyclopedia, Wikipedia is going to have a markedly high number of articles on subjects more intimately tied to the internet. Arkyan • (talk) 17:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- The disproportionate number of Furry, Otherkin, Therian and other like types editing on wikipedia would blow your mind. I think alot of it has to do with the percieved need to "defend" their subculture from the bashing that follows them around the internet. In the end it's just a huge mess but what are you going to do? NeoFreak 17:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
