Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dis-Connection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 delete. SushiGeek 07:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dis-Connection

You know, this article is clearly by someone who is familiar with Wikipedia and wikicode. Because unlike most webcomic fangush entries, this is actually a good article on the subject. It fails on a few points however, the article is written by the webcomic artist, a User:Metal-Geo. The website has been online for less than 2 months, and the Alexa ranking is almost 2 million. - Hahnchen 00:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete, nn vanity. Royboycrashfan 00:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 00:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as nominated. Brian G. Crawford 01:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity --Icarus 03:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete/neutral doesn't look particularly notable b/c of how new it is, but could improve Amcfreely 03:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I would like to keep because it's a nice looking article, but Google turns up 352 resultsl for "dis-connection webcomic" and the Alexa ranking is only 1,850,785 T K E 05:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Er, set out on my own with the alexa. Per nom! T K E 05:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, nn, vanity. --Terence Ong 05:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - article seems OK. Luka Jačov 09:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral - Semms OK to me, but becuase of its newness... Kilo-Lima|(talk) 09:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity, but a damn nice use of wiki, almost sad to delete... we need a "save this until popular" option... Nick Catalano contrib talk 12:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • weak delete unlike the other two web comics, I would be more inclined to delete this one, only because it was JUST launched.Roodog2k 13:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep It is a good article filled with useful infomation. --Siva1979Talk to me 15:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Super-Duper Weak Delete. Site age much more than alexa rankings make me thinks this should probably be deleted. Alexa rankings seem a bit problemmatic to me due to various reasons and the article is well written. Web-comics in general seem to be inherantly non-notable, and this one doesn't really seem to rise above the crowd. Tombride 16:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC) (second edit to properly add my signature)
  • Keep Seems good. --estavisti 20:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Good article, bad subject. Non-notable. Should be on the Dis-Connection homepage, not WP. NTK 20:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --ςerbiana ♫ 21:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, does not appear to meet WP:WEB. Has no outside references. Also appears to be vanity, considering the amount of information written about how the comic's artist saves files as backups on an external hard drive, which file format they are in, etc. -- Dragonfiend 21:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Nifboy 02:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. If webcomics are notable enough to be on wikipedia at all, what's the reason to delete this one? Short time of existence? Whats the limit then - 6 months, year, 2 years? It's nitpicking. Webcomics should be on Comixpedia, but until they are not moved completely there I see no reason to delete this one. SpeedyGonsales 14:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: No, I don't believe longevity equals notability at any point. If a garage band soldiers on for twenty years, they do not suddenly belong in an encyclopedia. The same goes for people that post things on the internet. For some guidelines on what may separate notable from non-notable webcomics, see WP:WEB. This article contains nothing which distinguishes this webcomic from a million others -- it's simply another webcomic, created with art supplies, which has characters and a story. -- Dragonfiend 15:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Damirux 15:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - PANONIAN (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Yrithinnd 16:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --Emijrp 16:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Hey, it's just a webcomic. Not Dilbert. BTW, the reason I came here:
Dialogue on #wikipedia-de
<Yatxov> wer hat account am englische wikipedia?
<Yatxov>I need a vote
greetings from german wikipedia where votes don't count on AfD but only arguments. --Elian Talk 16:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't see difference in significance between Garfield and this comics; as well as "significance" is inherently POV; as well as I can use harder words for that kind of measuring. And, yes, I would like to know scientific method for measuring significance; and what is "significance" by defitinition? and what is the relation between "significance" and science and one scientific encyclopedia? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 18:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. --Djordjes (talk) 20:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep; give it time, and try again. --VKokielov 21:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
I understand that there is a formed block, and that this formed block is a recognizable pattern. Now I'll tell you why the Serbs and the Croats are voting keep, to allay any deep suspicions. There exists a very real possibility that to delete this kind of article is counter-productive. Inasfar as it is a "vanity" article, it ought to be restricted; but to delete it is to shove a wrench into the niche of Wikipedia which is kept open to such things from the Internet culture. Impose your criteria here, and you will be made to impose them over articles on every other website you can imagine, not to mention freeware programs. It seems to me -- and maybe I'm only highlighting my limited ability to understand the Internet and the people who inhabit here -- it seems to me that Wikipedia is in a special communion with the web society, and that Wikipedia is in debt with this communion to this society. --VKokielov 05:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I think this webcomic may have potential, and perhaps in time it will merit an article. It's not reached that point yet, though. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 04:59, 14 April 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.