Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killroy and Tina

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 04:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Killroy and Tina

Killroy and Tina (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This is yet another non-notable web comic, whose notability, influence, and appeal seems very limited. The article fails to adhere to our established policies of notability, web content guidelines, verifiability, reliable sourcing, and encyclopedic standards. Most of the mentions of and sources for this webcomic are coming from its own site, blogs, forums, chatrooms, personal sites, social sites, and other freely usable discussion media - none of which are notable or non-trivial, or convey importance in any way. The influence of the comic on media, culture, and society as a whole is very limited to nonexistant. NetOracle 07:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletions. -- Sid 3050 14:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete no independent, reliable, non-trivial mentions. - Francis Tyers · 14:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per above. Edison 17:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment AFD is not a substitute for cleanup. Do note that of the 82,400 or so mentions of this comic online, not all are simply from the site, its blog, related forums, the commercial entities that have made money off of it, etc. There are also the two WCCA nominations this comic has received, and one of the nine profiles in an article titled "Webcomics exist"[1] in the Silver Bullet Comics zine. Balancer 09:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Borderline keep per my comment above and the standards outlined in WP:WEB. (Multiple nominations for a notable award, or, alternately, multiple independent non-trivial mentions, since WCCA nominations constitute a non-trivial mention in and of themselves). This may be strengthened if anyone else actually tries to verify whether or not this is a notable comic, as NetOracle surely has not. Balancer 09:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • WP:NOT a battleground; try to comment on content, not contributors. -- Dragonfiend 09:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I am commenting on the content, i.e., that the AFD was launched out of purest ignorance without even the most cursory attempt at verifying notability. AFD is not a substitute for {source} tags. Balancer 09:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Try to find a way to disagree with somebody without the "purest ignorance" stuff. --Dragonfiend 09:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, no sources, let alone multiple independent non-trivial ones suggesting any importance. WCCA nominations are trivial. -- Dragonfiend 09:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• What, no multiple non-trivial secondary sources?? Baleet. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 09:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails to satisfy WP:WEB, no independent sources.Freepsbane 18:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• weak delete I tried to verify it. No print version, no mention of awards that I can find, nomination or otherwise. 9 unique google hits total for "Kilroy and Tina" with one of them being this very wikipedia article. The single claim to notabilty is from sheer longevity, but even I need more than just that to keep it. Timmccloud 02:37, 20 February 2007 (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.