Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A + Plus Comics


 * 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. Courcelles 00:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

A + Plus Comics

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I can't find any significant coverage for this comic company. Joe Chill (talk) 23:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No sources can be found online. Google hits are for a comic store of the same name; Google Books hits are trivial. The comics clearly existed and now fall in the realm of collectibles. They were published long enough ago that I would give a lot of benefit of the doubt for sourcing; my guess is that this article was based on the creator's own collection of the books. But the article lacks any outside sourcing to show notability and is basically fancruft. --MelanieN (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep . I'm trying to see what I can find in the way of sourcing.  The 1970s underground comics scene is poorly documented, in general.  Some references may exist, but are almost certainly offline.  I'd be a little surprised if there's not something out there to cite for this, though, because the list of people involved is quite the who's who.  Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Changing my !vote. My best efforts are exhausted.  I cannot find secondary sources that discuss this title with the level of coverage and specificity needed to support an article.  On the other hand, I think I have the sources to author an article on the indie publishing house that produced this title.  It's going to be several days until I can get that article up (it's crunch time on my current development project).  If AFD hasn't concluded the fate of this article at that time, I'd propose a redirect to Megaton Publications.  AFD shouldn't be held open on my account, however; if I'm not done article-writing (or absent anyone else doing the heavy lifting before I get to it), I'd !vote to delete this article.  A history-only undeletion can be performed afterward to ensure attribution underneath the eventual redirect.  Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Google news search shows results where they are mentioned. They are notable because the stuff they produce is given sufficient coverage.   D r e a m Focus  11:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, a lot of the Google hits are false positives. This article is about A + Comics, a specific comic book title published by Megaton Publications.  There was also an indie publisher called A Plus Comics (also appearing as A+ Comics), which is totally unrelated to this title -- and almost certainly not notable.  And finally, there is an extant comic book store operating as A Plus Comics (also appearing as A + Plus Comics).  Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 13:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Google is unable to search for this. It searches for "A Plus", not "A + Plus".  Check the advanced search box and it'll show you what its searching for each time.  So if there was any mention of "A + Plus" It would not find it, since its only looking for "A Plus".  Megaton Publications gets some results, and if this was the only title they published in it, then that counts as coverage I would think. Add in the word "comics" and two of those results stand out.   D r e a m Focus  15:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron.  Snotty Wong   yak 17:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG, no reliable sources. All references are primary.  Snotty Wong   yak 17:08, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: per Dream. - Ret.Prof (talk) 01:59, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources shown in the article, and none have been provided here. The Google news search given above which supposedly shows "sufficient coverage" for this 1970s comic actually shows nothing but results for different completely topics from the 1940s and 1990s, and then doesn't even show significant coverage of those other topics. Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 07:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Google books search is the main thing. Its featured in "The Comic Art Collection catalog: an author, artist, title, and subject catalog of the Comic Art Collection, Special Collections Division, Michigan State University Libraries" and elsewhere.   D r e a m Focus  08:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a source for our purposes. That is solely a list of all the comics and comic-art materials owned by Michigan State University in one of their library's special collections.  It is not "significant coverage" by any means.  Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2010 (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.