Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titan Aresta

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk July 1, 2005 21:38 (UTC)

[edit] Titan Aresta

Vanity. Self-promotion by author of non-notable stick figure webcomic "Man and Goat" (no Alexa data; 180+ single-panel installments) — Gwalla | Talk 02:40, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Vanity--NymphadoraTonks 03:07, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Abstain - I would like to make several points. First, this article is not self-promotion; the author of Man & Goat resides in Canada (http://goatart.com/index.php?p=11), yet the article in question was written by a New Zealander. Second: Gwalla's derisive mention of 'stick figures' is a merely a refection of his personal taste, which should not be a factor in any decision on an articles fate. 180 panels is consistent with the length of time since its release; weekday installments for almost 10 months. Finally: Alexa's methods, as well as the very notion of web 'rank', are flawed, and its results are meaningless for niche sites such as this. 203.109.252.196 04:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • I'll concede that it's not strictly self-promotion; I was not aware of Mr. 203.109.254.50's nationality, and the article's style and content seemed consistent with the usual vanity pages that float through VfD. However, the mention of stick figures has very little to do with my personal taste, and very much to do with the amount of expended effort evident in the comic. The Alexa test is common for articles on websites that do not establish notability otherwise, and this one doesn't. — Gwalla | Talk 05:15, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Nonnotable/vanity. No publication data (except webpage). The strip with the most views on the site has less than 150 views. The most comments any got is 14. This thing is less notable than a less-than-avarage blog. -Snorre/Antwelm 07:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete vanity. JamesBurns 07:14, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: Wikipedia, like all encyclopedias, is inherently conservative about coverage. Since it is a tertiary source of information, nothing that is not well attested and discussed elsewhere should be included. New artworks are pretty much out by that criterion alone. Further, there are explicit prohibitions on advertising and autobiography and "vanity articles" (e.g. self publishing). Geogre 16:04, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.