Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TIN The Incompetent Ninja
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 no consensus for keeping, but following Abe's merge I've redirected TIN The Incompetent Ninja to Snafu Comics since there is a consensus that it doesn't need its own article. Follow the redirect back if any more information is wanted. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TIN The Incompetent Ninja and Snafu Comics
No claim to satisfying guidelines for inclusion of websites. brenneman{L} 01:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- This has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. brenneman{L} 01:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Claims are incompetent, not the ninja. M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 05:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Merge with Snafu Comics, which is notable--☆TBC☆ 05:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Merge to Snafu Comics. --Terence Ong 08:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've added Snafu Comics to this nomination. There's no evidence presented that it's any more notable than its Ninja brethren. Clearly if some supporting documentation is provided showing that this satisfies the notability guidelines for websites, I'll change my tune. - brenneman{L} 08:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Keep TIN I could see deleting, maybe, especially since it only has 20 strips or so, but not Snafu. Take a look at Snafu's Alexa traffic details. 17,105 is very good for a webcomic, and though I suspect Bleedman's doujinshi stuff might be the site's major draw these days, it illustrates Snafu's existence not only as an individual webcomic, but as a collective. That's more than all of DrunkDuck (already survived an AfD with a Keep, by the way). Likewise, its Google results look good, with 236,000 hits, and if you'll take a look at the first few pages of results, they're all about Snafu itself. Yes, the articles could stand some references, but I'm going to take the eventualist position and say that Snafu at least is sufficiently verifiable that some will be added. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 11:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Andy123 talk 12:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Both. Besides no claims of notability and no reliable sources and no signs of meeting WP:WEB, both articles are created and extensively edited by User:SnafuDave who writes on his talk page that "SnafuDave or Snafu Dave is the most common online user name for David Stanworth, Author of Snafu-Comicsand TIN The Incompetent Ninja." These two articles are therefore clearly WP:VANITY and counter to the official policy that WP:NOT for self-promotion. Also, note that the Alexa ranking for snafu-comics.com is particularly misleading here since there are at least 8 webcomics hosted on that site. -- Dragonfiend 15:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment WP:VANITY would have applied if this had come up for AfD back in October, but it doesn't now. This is the last edit I'd attribute with any confidence to the author. As far as the fact Snafu exists more as a collective than an individual comic, that's really an argument about what the content of the article should be, not whether or not it should exist at all. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 16:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment on unreferenced vanity articles: There seems to be agreement that Snafu Comics was an unreferenced vanity article back in October. What changes have been made since then that now raise this above an unreferenced vanity article? The differences between then and now are that some spelling and style errors have been fixed, the article has been categorized, and two sentences have been added ("Currently it has become home to a new series called Training Wheels. Additionally, it has been mentioned that Filibuster Cartoons is hosted on the Snafu Comics Server.") Snafu Comics may now be a categorized and spell-checked vanity article with slightly more unreferenced information ("it has been mentioned?") where all of the titles are now in italics, but it is still an unreferenced vanity article, and as such should be deleted. Merging one unreferenced vanity article (TIN The Incompetent Ninja) into another unreferenced vanity article (Snafu Comics) will not solve the problem that these are both unreferenced vanity articles. Let's delete them. -- Dragonfiend 03:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment This is as far as I'm willing to go: merge information about TIN into Snafu and rewrite the result to emphasize its existence as a collective. I just can't justify deleting it with the numbers I'm seeing. It'd be nice if we could add King of Fighters Doujinshi, PowerPuff Girls Doujinshi and Grim Tales from Down Below into it as well, but that's mainly because Bleedman's stuff creeps me out a little rather than for any legitimate reason. Such a move would be strenuously resisted as well. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 08:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment on unreferenced vanity articles: There seems to be agreement that Snafu Comics was an unreferenced vanity article back in October. What changes have been made since then that now raise this above an unreferenced vanity article? The differences between then and now are that some spelling and style errors have been fixed, the article has been categorized, and two sentences have been added ("Currently it has become home to a new series called Training Wheels. Additionally, it has been mentioned that Filibuster Cartoons is hosted on the Snafu Comics Server.") Snafu Comics may now be a categorized and spell-checked vanity article with slightly more unreferenced information ("it has been mentioned?") where all of the titles are now in italics, but it is still an unreferenced vanity article, and as such should be deleted. Merging one unreferenced vanity article (TIN The Incompetent Ninja) into another unreferenced vanity article (Snafu Comics) will not solve the problem that these are both unreferenced vanity articles. Let's delete them. -- Dragonfiend 03:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment WP:VANITY would have applied if this had come up for AfD back in October, but it doesn't now. This is the last edit I'd attribute with any confidence to the author. As far as the fact Snafu exists more as a collective than an individual comic, that's really an argument about what the content of the article should be, not whether or not it should exist at all. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 16:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Merge TIN to Snafu. Definitely had its roots in vanity, but now seems to be established as a credible site. Just zis Guy you know? 17:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I seem to remember a webcomic inclusion guidelines. Something like if it's been around a certain number of years or has a certain readership, it's eligible for inclusion. Has this changed? Olleicua 17:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I believe you're thinking about the guidelines Eric Burns suggested. We tried to use those for awhile, but we never got much buy-in from the general AfD audience. If you can prove a webcomic has a large readership, that certainly does help, though. For the most part, now we use WP:WEB, which is a relatively good, if sometimes rather vague guideline. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 17:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Keep: Insufficient reasoning given to delete both. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 22:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- Merge: We don't need individual pages for every section of the website. It's not so much that the pages are non-notable as that there isn't that much info on each page. Also note the web-traffic data given above. --Tjstrf 21:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I have rewritten the Snafu Comics article with TIN already merged in. Mainly what it needs now is a few references. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 15:45, 21 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.
