Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love and Marriage (comic strip)

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. - brenneman ^{L} 00:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Love and Marriage (comic strip)

Incomplete nomination by Gh87. Was PRODed (which Gh87 removed) as "This amounts to a vanity page and doesn't appear to have any notability." Ezeu 01:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete No notability of any kind asserted. Also, if this is nominated, then John Guzzardo must be AfD'd as well, as his only claim to fame is this comic. -- Kicking222 01:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: while Gh87 may have removed the prod, he did add the AfD; so kudos to him for playing by the rules. All the same, I don't think this meets WP:N, so delete. -- stubblyhead | ^T/_c 01:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no assertion of notability.--Jersey Devil 01:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nonnotable. Mukadderat 02:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 01:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable per nom. Kevin 02:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Article had the wrong website. I edited the article and fixed the problem jbolden1517^Talk 04:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: notability still not established, no independent forms of syndication or commentary from reliable sources. --Hetar 04:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: the article says that "efforts are underway to expand its distribution"; apparently these efforts include guerilla marketing in the WP. I like humor as much as anyone, but if we allow viral marketing for indie comic strips, we will have to allow Hollywood to build "buzz" for feature films at WP, shysters seeking venture capital for their "energy from the vacuum" scheme to employ socks and shills at WP in order to impress would-be investors, etc. ---CH 07:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. - Nick C 09:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• This webcomic has been out since 2002. How many readers does it have? Kim Bruning 10:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This comic is not distributed by any rich powerful companies, such as the mainstream media. We don't allow poor people to have wikipedia articles. Someday if this comic becomes famous and/or the author becomes rich then you can resubmit it.--AirportTerminal 12:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete As nom. Beno1000 13:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Can't resist AirportTerminal's argument. Vizjim 13:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm all for independent publishing, but I don't see any evidence that this is noteworthy enough for Wikipedia. Fagstein 18:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no claim to notability and it's not even syndicated M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 03:54, 23 May 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.