Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Fischbach

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 was delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Fischbach

Tom Fischbach (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Largely reposted content previously deleted A7, but it does make a stab at asserting notability. However, '6th out of 100 webcomics listed at topwebcomics.com' may not be the most solid claim to notability. The guy himself gets just over 1000 google hits, with us first, which is never a good sign. Opabinia regalis 01:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete, does not seem to pass WP:WEB criteria. Terence Ong 04:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Question I've seen a few web based comic artists posted to AfD lately. Is there a WP standard for this genre? Would he be notable if his comics were in print? --Kevin Murray 05:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Reply Kevin, the standard is covered by WP:WEB and/or WP:BIO for webcomic artists. There is an editor who has been systematically cleaning out the webcomics category via PRODs, AFDs, and probably CSDs when appropriate, so yes you have seen quite a few recently. --Dhartung | Talk 07:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - fails WP:BIO. MER-C 06:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Terence Ong. --Dhartung | Talk 07:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:V, WP:BIO, WP:BLP, etc. I've removed some unsourced personal details (none of which involved claims of notabilty) per WP:BLP, but this whole article needs to go. -- Dragonfiend 08:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • 'For the person, I don't see why we need an article. This should probably be merged to the article on the webcomic Twokinds, but that was speedy deleted back in November, because it didn't claim the business about "6th out of 100" or the 2 million hits per day. I consider this to be a claim, so I will undelete that article now, then I suggest we simply redirect. Mangojuicetalk 10:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
    • The "6th slot in the top 100 webcomics of all time" claim is at best highly misleading. That's a list that resets every month if I understand correctly, the list includes only a small fraction of the comics on the web, the list is open to manipulation, and it does not include many of the most read comics on the web. The idea that "If you don't count Penny Arcade (comic), Ctrl+Alt+Del, User Friendly, Sluggy Freelance, Diesel Sweeties, and on and on, well, then "this comic is #6" does not seem like much of a claim of notability. -- Dragonfiend 21:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless properly sourced and referenced i.a.w. WP:BIO and or WP:WEB by end of this AfD Alf photoman 15:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect per Mangojuice, but do I have to take issue with the nom's suggestion that having one's wikipedia bio turn up first in a google search is a bad sign notability-wise. I've heard that brought up in AFD before, and it seems to be a misconception. We're the top result for Bill Clinton and George Bush, too (although the web site for An Inconvenient Truth is the top result for Al Gore; must have something to do with him inventing the internet.) I've searched a few less-notable names (Christopher Fry and Chris Regina, for example), and the same seems to hold true. It looks like you need to have a web presence that is not just notable but really, really notable in order to beat Wikipedia's Google clout. The number of google hits may be a factor in determining notability, but the position of the Wikipedia article in question in the results probably shouldn't be. -- Vary | Talk 16:11, 28 January 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.