Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irregular Webcomic!

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 SPEEDY KEEP. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 00:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Irregular Webcomic!

Non-notability TheBilly 10:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, this looks like an interesting webcomic. JIP | Talk 11:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, in this case I'd go for notability by association with David Morgan-Mar (unless someone wants to argue writing multiple RPG books is not notable). Also, it might qualify for the longest running webcomic. If it ran for the past four years with only missing a day or 2 its schedule is a plus when it comes to WP:WEB guidelines for webcomics. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It's definitely not the longest-running (Sluggy Freelance?), nor even the longest-running uninterrupted (Schlock Mercenary?), but I say keep anyway. DS 00:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, unless we are about to go through and wipe a lot of web-comic articles. Donovan Ravenhull 12:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, IWC is since recently a part of Modern Tales and IWC-Strips are regularly published in the Pyramid magazine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 146.234.100.106 (talk • contribs).
• Weak keep; while, frankly, going through and wiping a lot of webcomic articles probably wouldn't be a bad thing, this one appears to be pretty notable as such things go, and certainly meets de facto inclusion criteria. — Haeleth Talk 13:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, You deleted Okashina Okashi, You kept Megatokyo (good), You want to delete this and you let Casey and Andy have it's own wiki? C&A is on freakin hiatus! TestingTesting 16:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep, This is one of the longer-running, regular, innovative and more notable webcomics. Aclapton 14:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - one of the most clear-cut cases for notability in webcomics. Really wish people would stop playing whack-a-mole with these articles. Phil Sandifer 15:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Notable, long-standing, is also published in print (Wizard magazine). User:Zipster —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.2.138.98 (talk • contribs).
• Keep - I love how people seem to put up webcomics for deletion as "non-notable" with no other basis for it than either they haven't heard of it or they don't like it. Go WikiPedia! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.249.176.9 (talk • contribs).
• Keep - I think being a published webcomic (in the Pyramid magazine) is enough to keep it Deadpunk 19:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - I'm not going to explain my vote because right now I'm too mad to do that without cursing. I have lost count (well, actually it was two times) on how many times I looked on wikipdia for some article, only to find out that the article existed, but was deleted. algumacoisaqq 20:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Four year old daily webcomic is good enough for me.-- danntm ^T _C 21:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Pile on Keep— Too good an article to toss, given that we've got much weaker material here. Wikipedia is not paper. Williamborg (Bill) 21:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep, while this is not quite as notable as 8-bit Theater or Bob and George, its author is notable, and the article seems to be okay. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 00:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep in accordance with above. Like it or not, webcomics are a part of modern culture: long-running, notable, and established webcomics deserve the same coverage Wikipedia grants to popular music, websites, &c. Skybright Daye 00:45, 5 September 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.