Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badmash

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 keep and move to Badmash.org. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 01:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Badmash

Appears to be non-notable, fails the guidelines at WP:WEB, I can turn up 117 google hits, nothing jumps out as being a reliable source. Hiding talk 21:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. WP:Vanity. I personally visit badmash occasionally, but I don't think it is notable enough to merit its own article. Perhaps worth a mention in an article about webcomics.Cdcon 21:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 21:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - vanity. Latinus 23:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The article is a sad little thing, but Badmash is fairly unique. I can't think of any other comic written from its perspective, at least none in English and with an American point of view. Also, if you do a Google search on "Badmash comic" as opposed to the geekier "Badmash webcomic", you get 14,300 hits. I'm also not convinced that vanity has been proven. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 00:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. I think this counts as media attention (fourth hit on the "badmash comic" google mentioned above), thereby passing WP:WEB. Nifboy 17:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

*Delete, non-notable webcomic. Fails WP:WEB -- coverage by an extremely minor, likely unreliable online zine does not mean "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works." -- Dragonfiend 17:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Ganeshk and his verifiable, reliable sources cited below. The article still needs some expansion based on those sources, of course. -- Dragonfiend 01:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep: They are notable. I quote from their website, Badmash’s weekly email reaches a diverse audience of 200,000+ subscribers. I am one of them. Do check out the media mentions. The title should be Badmash.org.- Ganeshk (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• In light of the above link mentions I would like to change my vote from delete to Keep, and apologise for not doing enough research before bringing this to afd. Hiding talk 01:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Badmash.org per Ganeshk. --Gurubrahma 05:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move to Badmash.org per Ganeshk. — Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:25, 25 January 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.